Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-15-2009, 09:55 PM   #1 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,139

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.8 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 73.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,930
Thanked 5,775 Times in 2,989 Posts
Maker of twin-turbo kit for Corvette claiming massive (167%) city MPG increase.

Via GreenHybrid ...



I don't quite know what to make of this. The claims are so outrageous I was compelled to contact the company for more information.

First, the story:

Quote:
What if you could have a 2008 Corvette that could get 40 mpg around town and 32 on the highway? How about you could not only get those mileage figures and your Corvette would also have over 650 horsepower? GenesVettes.com has done just that with their new Twin Turbo kit for the 2008 Corvette.
The car's EPA rating is 16 mpg city / 20 highway.

(FYI, 40 mpg is 167% higher than 16 mpg - that's the figure I'm referring to in the thread title.)

The kit consists of twin turbos plumbed into the exhaust under the rear of the car in place of the OEM mufflers, with plumbing to get the PSI back forward to intercoolers up front and then into the engine.

The company says the turbos are CARB registered and 50 state legal.



To try to build some eco credibility, they've given the kit a silly name, in my opinion: "Green Interactive Hybrid System"

I wrote to the email address on their site (http://www.neohydrotechnology.com) and asked what exactly made it a hybrid in terms of the general understanding of what a hybrid is in automotive terms:

The response:
Quote:
Hybrid does not necessarily mean a mix of gas and electric. We believe that more accurately it means a mix of two technologies. In out case patented rear mounted turbocharging linked to a conventional gas engine.
Okey dokey! Techically true. Also confuses the issue. Perhaps that's one of their goals, so I'll chalk it up to simple overzealous marketingspeak. (I didn't ask what exactly makes it "interactive".)

I also asked about the fuel economy figures: 1) if they were US gallons (because the company is in Canada), and (2) how they were determined:

Quote:
The licensor has done extensive real world driving around town and highway testing. How much fuel between fills divided by miles driven. We are using U.S. gallons.
So, unfortunately here we have another example of an organization with dyno time (!!) which does not deem using said dyno appropriate for producing valid fuel economy comparisons. Shades of the Truck Trend K&N filter/intake debacle?

I was also told:

Quote:
We drove a Silverado from Bellingham, WA to San Francisco towing a Corvette on a trailer through the mountains and averaged 19 mpg for the trip.

__________________
Latest mods test: 15 mods = 15% MPG improvement: A-B test, 2007 Honda Civic 1.8L, 5-speed
Ecodriving test:
Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown: Nissan Micra 1.6L



EcoModder
has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 10-15-2009, 10:02 PM   #2 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,585

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: 1,530
Thanked 3,367 Times in 2,121 Posts


Doug Palmear must be involved somehow...
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:08 PM   #3 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Sounds too good to be true.
Did they tell you the price? There are similar rear-mounted turbo systems available, but they don't claims the mpg figures...
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:16 PM   #4 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,585

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: 1,530
Thanked 3,367 Times in 2,121 Posts
Rear turbos aren't new.

They turbo it, chip it, and do the standard performance remapping.

That's it.

There is no hybrid even though they named it "Green Interactive Hybrid System". No batteries, no motors, no hydraulics, no compressed air, no flywheel... nothing hybrid.

My understanding of "CARB #s" is that having one doesn't automatically make it street legal. It just means the CARB has identified it.

They will be the first tuners in the world to double fe by merely throwing a turbo on.

Well why not. It seems there are no bad repercussions from lying your *** off these days.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:19 PM   #5 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,139

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.8 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 73.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,930
Thanked 5,775 Times in 2,989 Posts
I was editing the post as you guys were reading it. They explained the "hybrid" moniker because... a turbo + a conventional engine = technological "hybridization".

Technically true, but...
__________________
Latest mods test: 15 mods = 15% MPG improvement: A-B test, 2007 Honda Civic 1.8L, 5-speed
Ecodriving test:
Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown: Nissan Micra 1.6L



EcoModder
has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:22 PM   #6 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,139

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.8 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 73.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,930
Thanked 5,775 Times in 2,989 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
My understanding of "CARB #s" is that having one doesn't automatically make it street legal. It just means the CARB has identified it.
They're actually saying on their site:

Quote:
one of the few turbo systems that have a CARB EO #, making them legal in all 50 states.
__________________
Latest mods test: 15 mods = 15% MPG improvement: A-B test, 2007 Honda Civic 1.8L, 5-speed
Ecodriving test:
Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown: Nissan Micra 1.6L



EcoModder
has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:26 PM   #7 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,585

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: 1,530
Thanked 3,367 Times in 2,121 Posts
I saw that.

Quote:
Exempted parts are add-on or modified parts that have undergone an ARB engineering evaluation. If the part or modification is shown to not increase vehicle emissions, it is granted an exemption to emission control system anti-tampering laws. This exemption is called an Executive Order (EO) and allows the modification to be installed on specific emission controlled vehicles. Every Executive Order part or modification has an assigned number that can be verified by Smog Check stations, BAR Referee stations, or by the ARB.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermk...es/amquery.php


Quote:
EO: D-593 View PDF
EO Date: 8/3/2005
Manufacturer Name: Squires Turbo Systems, Inc.
Device: Turbocharger Kit
Device Type: Turbocharger System / Turbocharger Modification
Part_Number: Model_Specification: Modification_Allowed: Remarks:
1999 through 2005 model year General Motors trucks equipped with V8 engines, 2004 and 2005 model year Pontiac GTO vehicles equipped with a V8 engine, and 1998 through 2002 model year Camaro/Firebird vehicles equipped with a V8 engine The Turbocharger Kit includes the following main parts: Garrett turbocharger, model number T04E 60-1 (Trim P, 0.81 A/R turbine, 0.6 A/R compressor), piping from the throttle body to the turbocharger, piping after the muffler to the turbocharger, open element air filter, wastegate, and PCV switch valve. Control module is reprogrammed using a hand held programmer with no user adjustments. Installation requires the air filter to be located near the rear wheel fender. Passenger cars will have an open element filter and trucks may have either an open element filter or a closed element snorkel kit. Boost is limited to 6 pounds per square inch.
EO: D-593-1 View PDF
EO Date: 1/29/2007
Manufacturer Name: Squires Turbo Systems, Inc.
Device: Corvette TurboCharger Kit
Device Type: Turbocharger System / Turbocharger Modification
Part_Number: Model_Specification: Modification_Allowed: Remarks:
1997-2005 model year Chevrolet Corvettes
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermk...rmktdevice.php

There are, oh, a zillion turbo kits listed so that in and of itself isn't special or unique.

Oh, I remember what it was about CARB numbers: having one is NOT an endorsement for power or fe increases. It merely doesn't break any laws.
__________________



Last edited by Frank Lee; 10-15-2009 at 10:51 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:35 PM   #8 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
CARB ID doesn't mean it's legal, CARB EO does. (Exemption Order)

I'm not doubting that there was SOME FE increase, but I think 40MPG city is just a ridiculous thought.

Then again, check out that site name: NeoHYDROblahblah.com

I bet they're running some HHO in those turbos.

According to STS, makers of one of the rear-mount turbo kits, they don't even need intercoolers, and having them gives no performance increase, rather just increasing boost restriction and pressure drop. They did a piece on PowerBlock a few years ago on the STS kits. They were actually quite impressive.
__________________
"ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:44 PM   #9 (permalink)
Batman Junior
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 21,139

Blackfly - '98 Geo Metro
Team Metro
Last 3: 70.09 mpg (US)

MPGiata - '90 Mazda Miata
90 day: 52.8 mpg (US)

Winter beater Metro - '00 Chevrolet Metro
90 day: 73.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,930
Thanked 5,775 Times in 2,989 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
Oh, I rememeber what it was about CARB numbers: having one is NOT an endorsement for power or fe increases. It merely doesn't break any laws.
Same thing with "EPA registration". You have to register with them as well if you're going to market an aftermarket fuel economy product in the US. As with CARB, registration does not = endorsement, but some dubious companies market their registration in the hopes people do not know that. (Which is probably the case.)
__________________
Latest mods test: 15 mods = 15% MPG improvement: A-B test, 2007 Honda Civic 1.8L, 5-speed
Ecodriving test:
Manual vs. automatic transmission MPG showdown: Nissan Micra 1.6L



EcoModder
has launched a forum for the efficient new Mitsubishi Mirage
www.MetroMPG.com - fuel efficiency info for Geo Metro owners
www.ForkenSwift.com - electric car conversion on a beer budget
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2009, 10:50 PM   #10 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,585

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: 1,530
Thanked 3,367 Times in 2,121 Posts
Yes, I do find the rear-turbo concept appealing and wouldn't mind having one.

I wouldn't expect any fe increase at all though.

If, as CARB says, boost is limited to 6 psi, then according to this boost/HP estimator:

Quote:
Your new HP computed from your old HP of 420 at Blower Boost of 6 psi is 591.48 HP. Vette

Your new HP computed from your old HP of 315 at Blower Boost of 6 psi is 443.61 HP. Silverado
Wallace Racing - Estimate HP From Adding Boost Calculator

their claimed increases:

Quote:
2008 Chevrolet Corvette C6: 40mpg town (stock 16mpg, a 150% increase) | 775 HP (stock 420hp, a 84.5% increase) | 691 lbs torque (stock 424 lbs, a 62.9% increase)
2009 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 | 32mpg town (stock 14mpg, a 128.5% increase) | 500 HP (stock 315hp, a 58.7% increase) | 450 lbs torque (stock 338 lbs, a 33% increase)
GenesVettes.com - The Radical Solution

are rather generous.

Well, that would match the generous fe claims too.

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com