Fuel Savings Answer...

markmarc

Bobman:
The Sentra's were no worse of a death trap than other cars of their size. Good gas mileage has always been a selling point, but with stabilized fuel prices, manufacturers spent their energy on increasing the power performance. The point is, if they can increase power by 50%, they sould be able to do the same with gas mileage.

As for weight, cars are actually lighter now, due to advances in unibody designs even though the dimensions have grown.

Overall, all the manufacturers got kind of lax about fuel economy increases. Toyota and Honda went for hybrids since its splashy, but I still think dedicated engineering could have done the same with straight gasoline engines.

bobman1235

Well I didn't mean to single out the Sentra; a lot of the smaller cars of the early 80's were dangerous.

My only real point is that the auto manufacturers aren't conspiring to give us gas guzzlers; even if you believe there is some sort of collusion with the oil companies, if the market was really pushing hard towards fuel economy it would happen. But too few consumers in this country at least are willing to part with the comfort and power that modern cars provide just to save money on gas (and consequently the environment).

treitz3

The only "conspiracy" I would think would be true [if this actually happens] would be that the oil industry keeps taking new technology and quickly sweeping it under the rug before it has a chance to cut in on their profits.

I have seen so much new technology come out and it seems that as soon as it is reported, you just never hear about it anymore.

markmarc

It's not a conspiracy, but a total lack of long-term vision. Detroit was too busy in this decade trying to whiz bang us, instead of seeing that oil consumption by China and India was going to tighten demand. Toyota and Honda went with hybrids because they could see the future.

treitz3

"Hi,

This is a message from your customer service representative for JeffOtto.com Ltd. and the
PICC/HAFC engine modification kits. I hope you do not mind that I stay in touch and keep you
informed of what is happening in our extremely exciting project.

Dutchman Enterprises the manufacturer of the units attended the government sponsored WIREC show on March 4th. It was
the largest renewable energy conference in the world. By all accounts they stole the show with
their 180 mpg Dodge engine. Many scientists, chemists, and physicists attended their lecture and
they were very impressed with the process of converting one gallon of fuel to plasma and then
reforming the fuel to three gallons of fuel that can burn three times as efficient (an overall
increase of nine times!) By the way the whole project is tax deductible for U.S. consumers. The
EPA refuses to approve the PICC technology. There are now some legislators interested in
looking into possibly ordering them to test it. I guess the longer they can hold off the better for
their fossil fuels friends. It is inevitable that we will win, it is just taking longer than we had
hoped. In the meantime we have had a virtual tsunami of HAFC orders. We wish you would
consider joining our customers who are not going to be affected by the $4+ per gallon gasoline.
Even the HAFC's average double mileage increase would mean it would be like buying gas for
half price and that means a lot in this day. The average consumer buys over a thousand gallons of
gas per year and to save half of that is a $2,000 savings. The HAFC conversion including
installation costs a lot less than that. Dutchman Enterprises has worked out a way that you may
possibly be able to finance the whole thing and have an entire year to pay for it with NO
INTEREST! If you are interested I can give you the details.

I will be sending out updates to all those who have asked for a PICC quote from time to time as
information is made available. Thanks for taking the time to read this update. If you have any
questions please no not hesitate to ask.

Have a great day.

Andrea McLellan
(authorized representative for JeffOtto.com Ltd.)
519-925-0560
http://www.moneysavingtechnology.com"


This is a follow-up e-mail I received today concerning this product. Back when I inquired, the economy slowed business down considerably along with a bad business decision and was no longer a thought. Things have gone considerably better since then and business has doubled from what it was last year for my company AND gas is double the cost as well. With business booming again, the corporate gas costs are through the roof.

I will look up other e-mails that they have sent and give this and rebuttal posts a further review. Any input to this is welcome and appreciated. When I access the other information that this company provided, I will post it back to this thread. Thank you.

Hockeyboy, could you please provide a link to the forum that discussed this product? BTW, this company has not called my phone once and has had limited e-mails. They are not "pushers", which is welcome in a world of cutthroat business and shady sales tactics that are associated with today's economy.

ben62670

Lets see. My 68 Bronco gets 8mpg city, or Hwy. It would cost a dollar every 2 miles I drove! I was talking to my buddy today about building a one off custom all alluminum vehicle like a dune buggy with a wingshield, and some sort of soft top.

audiobliss

ben62670 wrote: »

I was talking to my buddy today about building a one off custom all alluminum vehicle like a dune buggy with a wingshield, and some sort of soft top.

Do it!! And then lemme drive it, too! :D

ben62670

audiobliss wrote: »

Do it!! And then lemme drive it, too! :D

Oh yeah you aren't too far from Conyers are you:)

Demiurge

ben62670 wrote: »

lol....You're lucky they didn't make it Goatsie.

Systems

Imagine all the fuel that would be saved if they changed the national speed limit to 60 mph.....

ben62670

Demiurge wrote: »

lol....You're lucky they didn't make it Goatsie.

WTH happened there

audiobliss

ben62670 wrote: »

Oh yeah you aren't too far from Conyers are you:)

Aye, I guess not too far.

bobman1235

ben62670 wrote: »

WTH happened there

Hotlinking images from external sites is often frowned upon by the host of said site as you are essentially stealing their bandwidth. So they will make any externally linked images from their site show up as something... different. Sometimes it's a tasteful message... othertimes not so much.

mrmusicman

Lorthos wrote: »

Imagine all the fuel that would be saved if they changed the national speed limit to 60 mph.....

They did this in the 70's during the"gas crunch",set the national maximum speed limit to 55 mph.I can't believe there's not a politician trying roll back the speed limt to 55 again ,I sure notice a difference in my truck between 65 and 75 mph.

treitz3

bobman1235 wrote: »

Hotlinking images from external sites is often frowned upon by the host of said site as you are essentially stealing their bandwidth. So they will make any externally linked images from their site show up as something... different. Sometimes it's a tasteful message... othertimes not so much.

Without knowing what hotlinking is, did I do it? I'm just trying to have a discussion that might help me and others out with something that is on the minds of many Americans. If I am guilty, I apologize.

ben62670

cleaned

ben62670

cleaned

treitz3

Ok, I'm lost here. Carry on......

ben62670

cleaned

SKsolutions

ben62670

Here you go SK...

SKsolutions

That's about right^^:D

NotaSuv

mrmusicman wrote: »

They did this in the 70's during the"gas crunch",set the national maximum speed limit to 55 mph.I can't believe there's not a politician trying roll back the speed limt to 55 again ,I sure notice a difference in my truck between 65 and 75 mph.

there is a growing movement among truckers for this very same thing....here lots just drive 55-60 reguardless of the 65-70 thats posted...and with deesill going thru the roof cant blame them...have alot of friends that haul cross country and I know their profits have been cut drastically..again usually the middle man who makes the $$$$$......

with my heep that gets 8-12 mpg I found the best way to save $$$ is drive offs and siphon from the neighbors

bobman1235

treitz3 wrote: »

Without knowing what hotlinking is, did I do it? I'm just trying to have a discussion that might help me and others out with something that is on the minds of many Americans. If I am guilty, I apologize.

Hahaha, it's not a big deal. When you display an image, someone has to host it on their website. Sites like photobucket and imageshack host images for you to use for free. But every time someone views that image, it "costs them money" in bandwidth. SO sometimes, when you link to a photo (using that IMG tag) that lives on another website, the person who runs that website will block you from doing thtat, and replace the image you meant to show with something like you see above, or, as Demi said, something much worse.

They did this in the 70's during the"gas crunch",set the national maximum speed limit to 55 mph.I can't believe there's not a politician trying roll back the speed limt to 55 again ,I sure notice a difference in my truck between 65 and 75 mph.

I tried for a week or so in my car to never crack 60MPH (and man was it difficult). It made no discernible difference in gas mileage (and I usually drive 75ish). Still got around 29MPG. When I drive 75 every day I get 29MPG. SO... I don't really get it.

mule

looks like some version of this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Pantone

exalted512

bobman1235 wrote: »

Hahaha, it's not a big deal. When you display an image, someone has to host it on their website. Sites like photobucket and imageshack host images for you to use for free. But every time someone views that image, it "costs them money" in bandwidth. SO sometimes, when you link to a photo (using that IMG tag) that lives on another website, the person who runs that website will block you from doing thtat, and replace the image you meant to show with something like you see above, or, as Demi said, something much worse.




I tried for a week or so in my car to never crack 60MPH (and man was it difficult). It made no discernible difference in gas mileage (and I usually drive 75ish). Still got around 29MPG. When I drive 75 every day I get 29MPG. SO... I don't really get it.

My truck gets better mileage at 80 than it does going 70. No real scientific proof, but when I went to visit my parents, there were two times I would keep the speedo at 70 and 2 times I kept it at 80. This is a 4 hour trip, mostly highway...both times I went 80 I ended up using a little more than a quarter tank less going 80...
4.8 V8 GMC...no idea what the gear ratio is though.

And to the OP--if that thing really did work, I assure you, it would already be on cars coming out of the factory.
-Cody

MikeC78

exalted512 wrote: »

And to the OP--if that thing really did work, I assure you, it would already be on cars coming out of the factory.
-Cody

I never stated that it did work, I just found the product and theory a little interesting.

BTW, unless your truck hits another gear at 80, which I doubt, there would be no way that you'd be getting better gas mileage at that speed. Check your RPM guage, I can almost guarantee you that the engine is moving more RPM's at 80 than at 70mph. More RPM's means more fuel consumption.

Mike

bobman1235

MikeC78 wrote: »

I never stated that it did work, I just found the product and theory a little interesting.

BTW, unless your truck hits another gear at 80, which I doubt, there would be no way that you'd be getting better gas mileage at that speed. Check your RPM guage, I can almost guarantee you that the engine is moving more RPM's at 80 than at 70mph. More RPM's means more fuel consumption.

Mike

You're also covering more ground faster. THe best mileage isn't necessarily where your RPMs are lowest, just where the ratio of fuel consumption and speed hits its peak.

THe reason going faster usually results in poorer gas mileage has more to do with wind resistance than anything else, which is something that won't register on your tach.

MikeC78

bobman1235 wrote: »

You're also covering more ground faster. THe best mileage isn't necessarily where your RPMs are lowest, just where the ratio of fuel consumption and speed hits its peak.

THe reason going faster usually results in poorer gas mileage has more to do with wind resistance than anything else, which is something that won't register on your tach.

You are correct, however; under the same circumstances(wind resistance aside) the faster the engine is rotating/more load equates to more fuel consumption. Right?

bobman1235

More fuel consumption per second / minute / hour, but not necessarily per MILE, since you're covering more ground per time period. See?