Fuel Saving Thread: Motoring Tips & Tricks

[pantaz]

If you installed enough of those gadgets that promise to improve mileage by 20%, you could manage well over 100 miles per gallon in a Hummer!

But seriously... Light foot on the accelerator is the single biggest factor for better mileage.

 

[mgb_phys]

But seriously... Light foot on the accelerator is the single biggest factor for better mileage.

Light foot on the brake is even better!

Yes you're right, aggresive accelaration is silly but once you are moving fuel consumption isn't a big function of speed at regular higway speeds.
Braking to almost a stop everytime you see the car in front's red lights o driving up to traffic lights at 50mph thene stopping dead is expensive.

Of course, if people just drove with a few more car lengths in front of them and watched the road ahead and predicted what was going to happen they wouldn't need to drive amoured cars to feel safe and the auto industry would collapse!

 

[turbo]

If you installed enough of those gadgets that promise to improve mileage by 20%, you could manage well over 100 miles per gallon in a Hummer!

But seriously... Light foot on the accelerator is the single biggest factor for better mileage.

I used to get the J.C. Whitney catalog regularly (needed lots of parts to keep my old Jeep CJ5 on the road) and I used to joke that I installed all the fuel-economy gadgets that they offered, and I had to stop every 50 miles or so to siphon gas out of my tank so it wouldn't overflow.

 

[mgb_phys]

That used to be the joke about the VW Rabbit - if you put it in overdrive it makes gas!

 

[turbo]

That used to be the joke about the VW Rabbit - if you put it in overdrive it makes gas!

They stole my joke! The Rabbit wasn't in production when I first owned my CJ. It had vacuum-operated (not electric) windshield wipers that didn't work too good when climbing steep hills.

 

[turbo]

Speaking of car jokes: Why did the Yugo have rear-window defrosters?A: So you could keep your hands warm while pushing it.

 

[Andre]

Tips to reduce fuel consumption.

1: buy a hybrid car or a TDi diesel.
2: don't be in a hurry. the fuel consumption roughly increases with the square of the speed.
3: Keep the car clean and shining, reducing skin friction. (strongly underrated factor)
4: Drive minimum rpm in a lower gear than usual
5: Do not brake, but anticipate well in advance about reducing/increasing speed when approaching traffic lights etc.

 

[mgb_phys]

They used to be about Ladas
http://www.ingilizceci.net/kalina/Lada Jokes.htm

 

[Redbelly98]

Would fitting an electric fan instead of the engine driven one improve millage?

I don't see how, as the battery gets its energy from the engine.

 

[NoTime]

I don't see how, as the battery gets its energy from the engine.

Because you only need the fan when the car is moving very slowly or stationary.
An electric fan is turned off when the coolant is below a certain temp.

Its been a long time since I've seen an engine driven fan on a car.
It's possible that there are exceptions, but they all seem to be electric nowadays.

 

[bassplayer142]

Don't take the drive belt off as you will disconnect the alternator and your battery will die.

 

[Danger]

Don't take the drive belt off as you will disconnect the alternator and your battery will die.

That actually just brought to mind something that I saw in a Hot Rod or Car Craft magazine back in the 70's. For some reason, this one guy's street rod had the alternator run from a pulley on the driveshaft. It didn't, of course, charge in neutral. I wonder if that would save anything significant in stop-and-go traffic.

 

[Redbelly98]

Because you only need the fan when the car is moving very slowly or stationary.
An electric fan is turned off when the coolant is below a certain temp.

Its been a long time since I've seen an engine driven fan on a car.
It's possible that there are exceptions, but they all seem to be electric nowadays.

Got it, thanks.

 

[regal231]

Don't take the drive belt off as you will disconnect the alternator and your battery will die.

Also, many vehicles drive the power steering pump and water pump from the main accessory belt.

 

[Naicamine]

To address those thinking of taking off the drive belt, its a nice idea, but it is simply not a wise one.
Everything that is run off of this belt is of importance, otherwise it wouldn't be there. Period. The benefit simply does not outweigh the consequences of removing it. My advice, as a technician in an auto shop is simply don't do it.

More to the point there are tried and true ways of conserving fuels, but keep in mind that not only do almost all modifications decrease the life of your motor, but they also void the factory warranty.

That said, I have been looking to alternative fuels as a most effective route. These include bio-diesel, fuel cells and flex fuels as well as other technologies. In my opinion the answer lies in the works of an inventor, Stan Meyer. His work in running cars off of pure water should be taken a lot more seriously. However, there are a lot of knock off ideas and hacks claiming to use his principles.

Be careful!

 

[brewnog]

That said, I have been looking to alternative fuels as a most effective route. These include bio-diesel, fuel cells and flex fuels as well as other technologies. In my opinion the answer lies in the works of an inventor, Stan Meyer. His work in running cars off of pure water should be taken a lot more seriously. However, there are a lot of knock off ideas and hacks claiming to use his principles.

As a technical person, you should know better than to believe the claims of Meyer. Water is not a fuel.

 

[turbo]

Yep. We may be eventually able to use solar energy to separate H and O economically and recombine them as a fuel, but Meyer's stuff was pure hokum. The laws of thermodynamics are not the "suggestions" of thermodynamics.

 

[elec2050]

I guess, I read in Popular mechanics that one company in CA has started commercial production of bio-fuel unit to be used in backyard, needs tree leaves and branches + bio waste like vegetables to make fuel. cost of unit $10K

Rick

 

[Naicamine]

To turbo-1 and brewnog in regards to the hokum of Meyer:

I hope that the both of you might enlighten me a little. As of yet, I haven't heard anything viable as to make me completely disregard the idea of hydrogen power from water. I hope for something better than simply restating the law of conservation of energy. I've heard that one, and, pun intended, it doesn't hold water; I don't plan on using more than 0.5 amps to split the molecule.

I hope either of you are not offended when I ask your credentials on the topic as I will freely admit I am not by any stretch a physicist; just a guy trying to save some gas money.

 

[turbo]

To turbo-1 and brewnog in regards to the hokum of Meyer:

I hope that the both of you might enlighten me a little. As of yet, I haven't heard anything viable as to make me completely disregard the idea of hydrogen power from water. I hope for something better than simply restating the law of conservation of energy. I've heard that one, and, pun intended, it doesn't hold water; I don't plan on using more than 0.5 amps to split the molecule.

I hope either of you is not offended when I ask your credentials on the topic as I will freely admit I am not by any stretch a physicist; just a guy trying to save some gas money.

How much energy is required to dissociate Oxygen and Hydrogen from water? How much energy is required to separate and compress these gases? How much energy is required to transport these gases and provide for their recombination to provide "clean" power? Am I surrounded by idiots?

 

[Naicamine]

Am I surrounded by idiots?

So much for not trying to offend...

As I stated half an amp is required to split the molecule, in a process that IS NOT ELECTROLYSIS as that is NOT efficient.

The compression shouldn't be a problem as it already occurs in any ICE I have ever seen. Well any that worked worth anything, anyway. There are those that had holes in a piston. There is no transportation of gases, only the water. In the past I hear this has been done previously by a remarkable device they called a "fuel pump." And I was pretty sure that since hydrogen is much more combustible than gasoline, it could possibly be that it may just burn more efficiently. Just a hunch. Maybe my idea of using a standard ignition coil is slightly flawed but I think I'll manage to find an alternative that isn't far from similar.

As for "clean fuel" I don't know if you realize that gasoline isn't exactly pristine, with the sediment from being buried in the ground and all.

Maybe brewnog has something credible to offer?

 

[Naicamine]

I should specify that it is not standard electrolysis. It involves the same ideas but instead of brute forcing the molecules apart, it uses electro-chemistry to its benefit.

And I didnt mean to come on strong. Its just that I am not prepared to listen to cynicism. Only facts.

 

[TR345]

Depending on the car, you can gain milage by installing roller rockers(rocker arms that have a roller bearing instead of a pivoting action) this reduces friction, increases engine life and adds efficiency. Make sure you replace the push rods and lifters as well so that they wear together right. You may be able to get a new camshaft designed for fuel economy as well.

You can get aluminum cylinder heads which are very much lighter than cast iron. You can also get an aluminum block for some engines. Aluminum intake manifold instead of cast iron. You can also get aluminum rims to eliminate weight. Carbon fiber hood/body panels also.

Headers/muffler/pipes, you can also use that insulating wrap around your headers to reduce extra heat in the engine compartment.

K&N or similar air filter/cold air intake(rout your plastic intake attachment so that it is in the front of the car with direct air contact(through the grill or something).

If you don't care about looks and comfort so much, you can strip out all the carpet and interior materials/plastic and stuff. I have seen want to be street racers do this and eliminate a considerable amount of extra weight.

Buying a hybrid cost a lot of money right, like 30 grand or so plus. How much gas can you buy with 30 grand? That much money alone could pay for years of gas. A couple years ago I bought a 1989 honda accord LXI for $1500. That car got 35-40 miles per gallon, and it is one of the most dependable cars ever made, my friends parents had the same car and it went to about 450,000 mile before anything major went wrong(transmission finally went). Why buy an expensive new car when there are old cars that get great gas milage. I believe those older accords got better milage than the new ones do.

 

[TR345]

To turbo-1 and brewnog in regards to the hokum of Meyer:

I hope that the both of you might enlighten me a little. As of yet, I haven't heard anything viable as to make me completely disregard the idea of hydrogen power from water. I hope for something better than simply restating the law of conservation of energy. I've heard that one, and, pun intended, it doesn't hold water; I don't plan on using more than 0.5 amps to split the molecule.

I hope either of you are not offended when I ask your credentials on the topic as I will freely admit I am not by any stretch a physicist; just a guy trying to save some gas money.

I remember from about 5 years ago I was reading about a type of fuel that was made by using a certain chemical to make water and oil mix which resulted in more efficient fuel. It had a specific name, and I'm pretty sure it was legit, can't remember, but I found this link which sound similar, sorry if it isn't fully credible.

http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2008/03/03/news/business/doc47c5005337448125816114.txt

 

[TR345]

Here is another link http://inventorspot.com/articles/breaking_the_oil_addiction_oil_and_water_do_mix_in_india_13751
well work looking into. While your there, don't miss the article entitle 10 ways to have fun with boobs, the write up is pretty funny. http://inventorspot.com/10_boob_products

Also wanted to add that you can eliminate your heavy heater chore if you live in hawaii or something and have no need for a heater.

 

[turbo]

And I didnt mean to come on strong. Its just that I am not prepared to listen to cynicism. Only facts.

It takes more energy to extract hydrogen and oxygen from water, separate, and compress them than you can get back by recombining them. You can reject this simple concept as "cynicism" if you want, but only if you can re-write the laws of physics and force the universe to obey the new "laws".

If there were a way to leverage this process, even to come up energy-neutral, we might be driving hydrogen cars today.

 

[Naicamine]

In the processes used for welding, such has been the case, but with what I have come to understand, I haven't been convinced that there is not a more economical way to do this.

I believe that the key is in high voltage and high frequency. Nikola Tesla did a lot of work that went misconstrued and unrecognized. We are not driving hydrogen cars today for the simple reason that no one smart enough to do it cared enough to do it or believed enough that it could be done.

However, due to gas prices and thanks to Honda, we are about to see them. It's just that the design is flawed. The hydrogen comes from natural gas, which pollutes as much as gasoline, and is put into a tank to make a bunch of portable hydrogen bombs.

I am not going to be able to do it myself. I am not smart enough. I need people to help me design the electronics.

Using a predicted value for the resonant frequency of Hydrogen at 42580000 Hz, then running somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 volts, depending on desired engine speed, at this frequency should be sufficient to break the bonds.

Obviously this is a rough estimate but its somewhere to start.

The issue is not separation, as the during extraction, the anode collects oxygen and the electrode collects the hydrogen. There are many established ways to bring them out using no supplemental energy. Nor is it transport as there is no reason for any hydrogen to go through the fuel system until just before injection. The only problem is finding how much energy is needed to break covalent bonds using resonant frequency. Some argue that this is impossible while Nikola Tesla knew with enough effort he could crack the world like an egg.

Although he created some enemies he did demonstrate that there was something to his calculations by setting up a machine that hit the resonant frequency of buildings, and causing buildings surrounding his own to shake and almost fall. After calls to the police and a moment of realizing the danger, he terminated the experiment with a sledge.

 

[brewnog]

I hope either of you are not offended when I ask your credentials on the topic as I will freely admit I am not by any stretch a physicist; just a guy trying to save some gas money.

My credentials are that I'm a degree qualified engineer, with 3 years experience working in powertrain.

However, the GCSEs I have in physics and chemistry are enough for me to know that water cannot be separated to its bare elements without the input of an amount of energy greater than what will be gained during its subsequent combustion.

If this "cynicism" is not enough like "fact" for you, then perhaps rather than look for others to convince you otherwise, you pick up a few science books and learn for yourself.

Finally, it's worth remembering that great technology isn't the result of inventors "believing" that their creation will work. It's a result of them fully understanding (and using) the science behind their goal.

 

[Naicamine]

My credentials are that I'm a degree qualified engineer, with 3 years experience working in powertrain.

However, the GCSEs I have in physics and chemistry are enough for me to know that water cannot be separated to its bare elements without the input of an amount of energy greater than what will be gained during its subsequent combustion.

If this "cynicism" is not enough like "fact" for you, then perhaps rather than look for others to convince you otherwise, you pick up a few science books and learn for yourself.

The cynicism I referred to was not from you. You hadn't posted yet other than to say you thought it couldn't be done. I apologize for any offense.

I also appreciate the advice, and I do consider it meaningful, although I do understand the principles of research.

 

[brewnog]

The cynicism I referred to was not from you. You hadn't posted yet other than to say you thought it couldn't be done. I apologize for any offense.

Then perhaps you should answer Turbo1's question about bond energies.

 

[Naicamine]

I also appreciate the advice, and I do consider it meaningful, although I do understand the principles of research.

 

[turbo]

I also appreciate the advice, and I do consider it meaningful, although I do understand the principles of research.

The first law of thermodynamics relates to the conservation of energy. You can never get more energy out of combining hydrogen and oxygen than it took to separate them initially, even in a perfectly 100% process. Of course, such a 100% efficient method has not been developed - there will be losses at every stage. There is no magic method to dissociate hydrogen and oxygen from water - you will ALWAYS need to input more energy to break those bonds than you can ever get back by recombining the gases. Then when you have collected the oxygen and hydrogen, you will have to cool and compress them so that they can be contained in volumes modest enough to fit in a vehicle and be burned in its engine (ICE, turbine, whatever). All this requires a large and power-hungry infrastructure.

There will be combustion heat losses no matter what type of engine is used, and losses due to friction. If you decide to use fuel cells, there will be resistive losses, perhaps 50% heat loss, and some additional loss due the transport of unreacted fuel - then there will be additional losses in the electric motor and drive train.

 

[Naicamine]

Where do magnets get their energy?

Maybe I can use the principles there to help me.

 

[Naicamine]

When you use hydrogen as a fuel, the reaction of
combustion: 2 H2 + O2 → 2 H2O produces a certain amount of energy we can call E

Accordingly, as the law states, when you make hydrogen from water, the reaction of
electrolysis: 2 H2O → 2 H2 + O2 requires a minimum amount of energy E.

I know what the law is. However, why is it that you can have a magnet stuck to a surface for years with no supplemental energy source?

 

[TR345]

Magnets have extra electrons and hold that charge which gives them a magnetic field. When they lose their charge, they lose the magnetic field caused by it. The electrons don't transfer into your refrigerator and to the ground, but the magnetic field is still there and that is what holds the magnet.

Only certain materials are capable of holding a charge like that. An electro-magnet using copper requires an electric current supplied by a power source which passes through it. Magnetic fields and electric fields are two parts of one system.