Massive Discrepancy in Fuel Economy

If your 6000# pickup got 100 mpg it would accelerate like your 140000# log truck.

It isn't quite fair to say that a 140000# log truck and a 6000# P/U would go from zero to 60 MPH if both got 100 MPG!

There are a lot of items that create rolling resistance, tires, wind resistance, bearing resistance, shape of vehicle, height, difference of fuels etc.

If you want to look at "apples to apples" allow me to comment about my 1995 F150 6 cyl. It gets a base MPG of 14.2 MPG accurately measured. After installing a Eco- Fuel device, the same truck (no major changes) now gets 46.6MPG. Agreed it is not 100 MPG yet but (maybe soon). There is no perceptive change in acceleration.

I ask myself over and over why can't the auto and truck Mfg's do this ? The answer always comes up the same ---they have no profit motivation.

Never said that. The log truck gets still 5-6 mpg. check my post.

Tell us more about the eco fuel device.

Please

Hey Flashlight- if you will review Guest's Post very carefully you will see a lot of what works (especially on pre-1996) engines but not as good on later models (OBDII).

I can tell you that our third generation ECO friendly system is going thru final testing re: normal things such as current, voltage, reliabillity, our mfg's Liability, Product Liability, Material/parts sourcing, Pricing, etc. We are taking it slow because we do not have deep pockets and can't afford to put a half baked system out that could fail because we were in too much of a hurry. AFarmer

You spout male cow excreta.

Hey Cowboy- THERE ARE "NO" MALE COWS !! THE MALE GENDER OF THE "genus Bos" is a Bull. Possibly you are an expert on the "excreta" part.

There are none as blind as those who refuse to see outside the box!

"There are none as blind as those who refuse to see outside the box!"

The words of a scammer, if I ever heard any.

What makes you think your better, than the people that, for the last 500 years, have been trying to beat the laws of physics. No one has done it, and you won't ether. However, you may succeed in parting ignorant, but good people from their money. Look over your shoulder, you may be being scammed yourself. How much of your money have you put into this? I hope it's not more than you can afford.

Invest your money in education.

If not, I hope you sleep well at night.

Pure lies......

I feel if that were true the aftermarket would produce a chip to enhance mileage and make a fortune, or has that been done and the oil company's bought the rights, like the "100 MPG carburetor"? Raw fuel out the tailpipe... that must be good for emissions?

Actually the aftermarket produces chips that give more power, but worse mileage. Some of these still produce acceptable emissions. Some don't, these are supposedly sold for off-road or racing use only.

Guest:

It's fun to pretend, huh? Especially conspiracy, we all love to play that game. There are some highly credible conspiracy theories concerning important issues. This is NOT one. The issue is important, but the theory lack credibility.

You are suggesting that in collusion the auto companies all agree to worsen fuel economy so that the very profitable oil companies maintain high margins, when many of the auto companies are going out of business?!?

Auto companies would kill right now to be able to year over year increases in vehicles sold. there would he huge demand for new vehicles that had essentially the same price but got twice the mileage. Auto execs would killl their grandmas and sell their left knee cap to get sales up again and avoid being the execs that killed the auto industry.

Htmleditor - blank page No headings found. If this site is important to you, please email us the URL to contact@hyperwords.net and we'll try to support it for the next release of Hyperwords

Guest,

I agree...

If you ask the head CAFE chief in California whether he (last time I called, he was a he, but, hey, this is California, he may be a "she" now...) has ever seen a 100 mpg "carburetor" he said no. He also said to me that if I had a 100 mpg car, he would be my best "friend" (I am not sure if that is a good or a bad thing...) and help out (government is here to help me???) in any way he could (read your tax dollars) to get that car to market ASAP.

Look, if someone has a 100 mpg car, that is safe, AWD, tows a boat, fits 8, you will be in fun heaven, that is, if you like auto companies kissing your rear 24/7.... In fact, you might even have more fun messing with Senators and Congressman...by telling them you want a "bailout"... Put another way, if you have a 100 mpg car, and you don't give the technology to the auto company that was bailed out (GM and Chrysler?) the Congressman will be out of a job, or look like a total idiot.

Likely they will write legislation to force you to give it to GM and Chrysler to save their rear ends. Remember, sanity is not welcome in Congress...and they think they own you... Imagine how this would look if I or you had such technology and said to Pelosi that she and her Ilk must go, or the Japanese/Germans get it... The fun one could have!!!!

I guess this is why Government/private partnerships should alway be illegal. You never know when someone, like myself, just might get so motivated to actually make that 100 mpg car just to screw over Congress. That alone is worth it!!! Can you imagine the incentive to block someone like me, or you, with such technology when the bailout goes to $125 billion???? Well folks...some day it will happen...timing...oh how fun...

" He also said to me that if I had a 100 mpg car, he would be my best "friend" (I am not sure if that is a good or a bad thing...) and help out (government is here to help me???) in any way he could (read your tax dollars) to get that car to market ASAP."

Can you post an address? I can convert an existing car (actually a crew cab pick-up would be easier) to get 100 mpg "gasoline equivalent" (35 kW-hr/gallon?) and win the automotive xprize. It will not involve scarce or toxic materials (no fancy batteries) but will be electrically powered. Nobody, not DoE, not EPRI, not Ford, GM, Chrysler, nor Toyota will even read my proposal; the lawyers intervene or, in the case of DoE at least, they don't want to admit there is a better way after spending vast sums on unproductive research. The technology was proven in Germany in 1930, but not-invented-here reigns supreme. See US Patent number 5,832,728.

Hi Guest- love your humor! that is what I meant about they do not see any profit in helping us get better MPG. What I eventually found out was, up until 1995 most of the Mfg's used OBD I and went to OBD II in 1996 with another update in 2005. If my info is correct their main purpose is to tighten the sensor windows (and add sensors) supposedly to gain more MPG and maybe make it hard for us to manipulate anything? Would you think? Thank you for all your comments in the past as I have learned a lot from you! A lot of them worked but some left a lot to be desired. But thanks anyway. AFarmer

Hello backman2,

I don't know? Granted to to move the same weight in half the time you must square the power.

In the late 79 we rebuilt a pickup that had an Isuzu 6BB1 diesel with a C6 automatic tranny in it. Once turbocharged and a 5 speed manual were installed It got 25 plus miles to the gallon. It didn't seem to care if it was loaded. We called it the great white whale. ( no clue how us teen gear heads came up with that one) It was my Dad's pickup that he used for oil barrel deliveries.

If I was driving this in 1980, why does my Dodge get 16mpg on a good day? And why has the failing U.S. oil owned car companies not done the same?

Self interest. The same reason GM sold the batteries patents to its parent company who sold it to another oil conglomerate who pulled the patent rights. (details in a prior CR4 blog) thus the GM electric cars we pulled.

and we just paid them for it and may yet again.

Brad

And why has the failing U.S. oil owned car companies not done the same?

If those car giants owned by the oil Co's then they should go for help to the oil guys and not to Washington for help.

Seaplane guy has put some good equations into the debate.

In simple terms for a given size and weight of truck, rolling resistance is fairly constant.

Aerodynamic drag is a function of the SQUARE of the speed.

Power - and thus fuel used - is a function of the CUBE of the speed.

Try it yourself if you have a car with a fuel flow calculator as most have these days here in UK.

Cruise on a windless day on a flat road at the higest speed limit(70mph here) check the mpg figure - I get 47mpg . Then cruise on the same route at 60 the 50 then 40 mpg all in top gear. My VW Passat gives 86 mpg at 40 mpg ( UK Gallons). I get these high figures by running a high spec synthetic oil in the engine and gearbox, and by keeping the tyre pressures at the maximum suggested by the tyre makers - 44psi for mine.

Thus your truck could do more mpg at the same speed as the log truck if the engine and gear ratios were suitable.

Please clean up your mpg's and mph's!

Which engine and transmission do you have? I have a 2004 Passat sedan with the turbocharged 4-cyl and manual 5-speed. Of course I am using US gallons, so the values are lower, and I am using the recommended 34psi in the tires.

I live in the foothills, so haven't had many chances to try flat straight roads. I'm averaging close to 32 USmpg.

Thanks, you are absolutely right, I need to be more careful on the mpg and mph - sorry.

The car is the 1900 Tdi 110bhp manual 5 speed of 2001 model year. I always have the aircon off - up to 4 mpg saved here. Yes I run the tyre pressures at 44 psi as per the tyre makers max rather than the VW book figures. This makes a dramatic difference, although cats eyes are rather clunky. However it does reduce front tyre costs as I do not suffer from the usual shoulder wear.

I was so surprised by the good mpg figures that I even took a GPS to check the speedo and odometer, and did two tank ful to tankful tests to check that the trip computer was not lying!

add in that the logging truck is all hiway driving. Put the personal truck on city streets, tune it for minimum emission and not max eff, you get 16 mpg.

I just can't agree with your statement, "the logging truck is all hiway driving".

Logs come from places with no roads. The roads that are available are not straight, level parkways. Sometimes these trucks travel considerable distances in lower gears and at higher RPM before they get to the "hiway".

LL

What the others are asking: what is the topology that your are traveling in? Were are you and do you travel with loads the one way and not the other. There is no way that this could happen with out closer inspection of the route. Load, or no load, coming from, or going to.

Scale of economy maybe?

Keep saving and use the big stuff if it gives better mileage!

Good luck, Ky.