OBII Smarter than us?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by racprops

I did not see any cheating and the Tesla did have range problems...

And all the cars I know of would have trouble going any where over 400 to 500 miles on a tank.

Which merely demonstrates that perhaps neither your observational abilities nor your knowledge of cars are quite as good as you believe them to be :-)

FYI, the 1st gen Insight has a 10.5 gal tank, but for me a typical fillup was about 9.5 gal, at roughly 700-750 miles. (Nowadays it's 350-400 miles on a $20 bill.) Other people have done quite a bit better.

[racprops]

Look back at history, like the Chrysler Turbine Car, noted was how it would run on any burnable fuel BUT it main problem was it lack of service needed and its projected million miles life.

In a couple of the articles they even said "We honor the high octain gas and the ICE."

And how about the Saturn Electric Car, same problem, lack of parts and service needs.

Consider our printers many have ought on that they nearly give the printer away so they can make money selling us ink.

Again I will point out this article to new comers:

The Silver Bear Cafe

Read it and do some research on all of this.

Originally Posted by Fat Charlie

It's about planned obsolescence. They collude to advance mpg only within narrow limits, agreeing to only produce big gains with hybrids and awkward looking bodies. The idea is to allow continual incremental improvements, selling more new cars every year.

[racprops]

You may be right I have not owned many small cars, only a two VWs a 65 and 69, and 91 Toyota and a 85 Mazda.. and a 97 Cad Cataria, all which NEVER got better that 35MPG.

And we had them for years....the 69 VW was run to and back to LA and Phoenix a few times...as was the Mazda.

I am 65 so I have had a lot of cars over the years and none were MPG greats, including a 56 Studebaker with a 3 speed and OD...

So I thought as I was a machinic in my early years (points and carbs)and am still fixing and carrying for all my cars (Fuel Injected) hat I know some of what I talk about.

But I also have only owned older cars...so those that your pointing out could be doing better, BUT again I ask as most here ARE hypermillers, was those numbers stock with hypermilling or without?

Rich

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Which merely demonstrates that perhaps neither your observational abilities nor your knowledge of cars are quite as good as you believe them to be :-)

FYI, the 1st gen Insight has a 10.5 gal tank, but for me a typical fillup was about 9.5 gal, at roughly 700-750 miles. (Nowadays it's 350-400 miles on a $20 bill.) Other people have done quite a bit better.

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

VWVortex.com - Passats in other countries get 78.5 mpg, interesting take on why we don't get them

Toyota Urban Cruiser SUV review | CarBuyer
57.7 extra-urban = 48 mpg U.S. gallons but not EPA hwy.

Geez, I thought I could be nice about it and merely hint that your referenced silver bear cafe page is a mixture of half-truths and complete B.S. but NO, ya had ta make me SPELL IT OUT.

300 mpg cars and HHO... come ON, give us a BREAK. TAKE that kind person's advice and dig around in the UNICORN CORRAL, you will be very at home there.

[racprops]

Really??

I never said 300MPG cars, (although there was a Shell MPG contest where a Opel got 376MPG, on record)

http://race-cardrivers.com/Shell%20Opel.htm

So these articles are all lies, and so is Top Gear, and many others??

And I guess my own statements are also all lies??

Never mind.

Rich

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Geez, I thought I could be nice about it and merely hint that your referenced silver bear cafe page is a mixture of half-truths and complete B.S. but NO, ya had ta make me SPELL IT OUT.

300 mpg cars and HHO... come ON, give us a BREAK. TAKE that kind person's advice and dig around in the UNICORN CORRAL, you will be very at home there.

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by racprops

If you read the answers I received you might understand my slight lean toward less than happy..responses.

Thanks for the link BUT it is for a pre-OBII car and a import and already a enco car as well...

So I guess there is no help here...

Tell you what I will be looking into gas vapor next and if I get a working system I come back and tell you guys about it.

Projection is 100 to 200 MPG.

Rich

Sorry, my bad, ONLY 100-200 mpg, and you will get it with still more unicorn tech.

[UltArc]

During episode seven of series twelve, Clarkson presented a segment featuring the Tesla Roadster, including a test drive. The segment showed the car's provided batteries running flat after 88.5 kilometres (55.0 mi), with Clarkson claiming that the recharge would take 16 hours. Following this, he claimed that the car then broke down. Tesla Motors spokesperson stated that the cars provided never reached less than 20% charge, none needed to be pushed off the track at any point, the recharge time was 3.5 hours, and the brake failure shown in the segment was actually a blown fuse.[28][29] The BBC responded to these claims with a statement saying, "The tested Tesla was filmed being pushed into the shed in order to show what would happen if the Roadster had run out of charge. Top Gear stands by the findings in this film and is content that it offers a fair representation of the Tesla's performance on the day it was tested", without addressing the other concerns.[29][30][31]
The comments were made following Clarkson showing a limp windmill, and complaining that it would take countless hours to refuel the car, using such a source of electricity. A BBC spokeswoman said several times in an interview that Top Gear was "an entertainment programme, and should not be taken seriously."[32] After several weeks, Clarkson wrote a blog for The Times, acknowledging that "the film we had shot was a bit of a mess", but defending the film's claims.[33] In the months following Clarkson's acknowledgement, the original episode, including the mis-statements, was broadcast on BBC America and BBC Australia without any edits being made. It has been reported that the BBC is still looking into the show's journalism standards.[34] In March 2011 Tesla Motors filed a suit accusing the BBC of libel.[35]

Top Gear controversies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I like that they use sources, [and] this [quoted] is the only section I think applies.

I'm quickly losing interest in this thread. 4-500 miles isn't a stretch, at least for me, and hypermiling and driving with sense are very different. Driving with sense, not racing to red lights, not racing stop sign to stop sign, not sitting and waiting with the engine running (trains, AT machines, so on). If you want to drive like a maniac, like many people with my same car who get <15 mpg, then maybe this isn't the best place for advice.

Here is our HHO: hho - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - Threads Tagged with hho
Gas vapor: gas vapor - Google Search
And the rest of their team: The Unicorn Corral - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com

[racprops]

OK question is what happened to the law suit??

And I will consider this as more or less as fact.

So that is one down and few others not taken down.

That is 1 for you and 6 for me?

Also I don't drive like that and you know it from my posts, and you did not make it clear if your hypermilling or not to get those MPGs..

Rich

This my old test system:
Look I have found that you guys are not able to help me in my quest.

BUT to answer here is what we did for our testing.

1) Customers were asked to fill the car on its way to us, to have full tank when we started. We once did a test on a car that we filled up adn then tested for 50 miles and when we retuned we had more gas than when we start out...Thermo expansion of the gas in the tank...

2) We then checked the car over and then drove on Cruse Control @ 65 MPH 50 miles out on I 10 to a truck stop and had lunch and drive back and then filled the tank and calculate the MPG, IE these cars both got 32 MPG Stock.

3) We would do the HHO Kit install.

4) do the tuning and adjustments.

5) fill the tank and do the same road test again.

6) As we were not looking for small improvements but big ones we did not worry the small MPGs.

7) One problem was of the two cars that did so well was the lack of what we wanted, a long road test of some 300+ miles, both times the owners pulled out at this point.

We then when ahead and bought two systems of our own and then tried to find suitable cars to test them on.

We lacked any good OBDII cars.

I tried a Cad Catara and found I could not retune the computer, and found a few flaws with the system we were trying to install, so all of this fell apart.

Every hear of Dutchman and the HAFC?

Later I hooked up with a backer and thought a 2000 Ford was a good bet.

It is rigged with as many gauges I could think of getting, from a Exhust gas temp readout,, Air Fuel ratios read outs, Injector duty cycle read outs, a Scan Gauge Ii, a MPGunio. and Vacuum Gauge, a Tach, and I have two OBDII Scanners one in a lap top and the other a hand held unit that will also read OBDI, I also added two digital amp meters to really watch the amp draws of the HHO systems.

I even bought a portable weather station so I could check weather conductions should I have some results.

I took the car on a 300+ road trip and check its MPG and on the out run recorder 30 MPG and on the return trip was detoured off I 10 and had to take some back roads and ended up with 27 total.

Then before any testing I had the car dynoed and we ALSO ran the full driven NOT the OBDII Computer test..DRIVER ON THE DYNO SMOG TEST for the record so I could return and retest and compare.

Then and only then did I start trying things.

First up was the stories of resetting the car's A/F Rations, as I had devices that would allow me to reset them and I found the best was around 16.7 to 17.4 which was 34 to 36 MPG after which MPG dropped again, and I watched my exhaust temps to see if the lean burn would cause any temp problems, it didn't.

These test were mostly done on the same 100 mile run on I 10.

Next was a better HHO cell and test around 15 amps per bank for a total of 30 maps.

I was unable to get any improvements, even running lean.

My funding ran out and I set these projects aside for a couple of years.

I restarted with new info on HHO and again failed to get any improvement and took it back out and tried a additive and although the car feels more powerful, got no MPG improvement which led me to my now famous is OBDII Smarted that us, thread.

And here we are.

Rich

[racprops]

And I will say again:

You may be right I have not owned many small cars, only a two VWs a 65 and 69, and 91 Toyota and a 85 Mazda.. and a 97 Cad Cataria, all which NEVER got better that 35MPG.

And we had them for years....the 69 VW was run to and back to LA and Phoenix a few times...as was the Mazda.

I am 65 so I have had a lot of cars over the years and none were MPG greats, including a 56 Studebaker with a 3 speed and OD...

So I thought as I was a machinic in my early years (points and carbs)and am still fixing and carrying for all my cars (Fuel Injected) hat I know some of what I talk about.

But I also have only owned older cars...so those that your pointing out could be doing better, BUT again I ask as most here ARE hypermillers, was those numbers stock with hypermilling or without?

[H-Man]

My car is currently stock and in city and highway traffic sans hypermileing I'm getting 37-39, all I do is time the lights so that I can get home quickly.