PDA

View Full Version : Improving gas mileage...not just for the 80s anymore??


corsair23
03-18-2008, 05:30 PM
There is a thread over on MUD about ways to improve the fuel mileage in an 80. Initially it was just a couple of folks (including Rick / Landtank) talking about some ideas...

Then a person by the name of SS_Storm claiming he knows of a technology that will provide an improvement of 50% or greater in fuel mileage, on ANY vehicle...

Color me suspicious BUT I'm following along and watching...Anyway, SS-Storm posted up a link to this page that has information on the technology. There are two components....The HAFC which is supposedly available now and which will take advantage of the PICC which is to be available later...We'll see

Anyone heard of this or is it just more snake oil?

http://www.preignitioncc.com/ps/index.htm

AxleIke
03-18-2008, 05:44 PM
Idea seems like it could work. I'll let others be the guinea pigs though. if it does, I'd do it in a heart beat.

calphi27
03-18-2008, 08:01 PM
I hear that this is a great idea for a better mileage :hill:

calphi27
03-18-2008, 08:05 PM
But seriously: I am lucky to get 15mpgs right now with the correct wind. So a 50% increase puts me at 22.5 mpgs. For that amount of improvement, I would rather go diesel and run bio then mess with a new invention.

daisydog34
03-18-2008, 08:30 PM
Its really not a new idea, and from what I hear it should actually work. Well at least the part that is avail. now. Basically what that part mostly does is split an h2o molecule dump the o2 and feed the H into your intake. Thus you have kind of a hybrid fuel cell vehicle. A buddy of mine has a home made version of this on his DD and he went from around 22 mpg to 60 mpg. The technology has been there for years, the oil companies just didn't want you to know about it untill now.

nakman
03-18-2008, 09:28 PM
Ok, so how much is the thing? $100? $1000? I'm in for a group purchase of one if it's at all reasonable.. Corsair we'll slap it on one of your trucks then you see how it does. If it bites, we get our money back. If it works, you'd be a fool not to pay the rest of us our shares and keep the thing. Then we all rush out and buy one. win-win, right? :)

edit: ok I just found the mud post http://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-tech/200967-better-gas-mileage-tuning-2.html. So $1000 for the thing, then a "professional" install? I'm a little fuzzy there, I'm not sure my mechanic has been to this seminar yet. Anyway, I'm in for a bill if 9 of you other guys are, let's put one in Jeff's LX.

corsair23
03-18-2008, 10:24 PM
Ok, so how much is the thing? $100? $1000? I'm in for a group purchase of one if it's at all reasonable.. Corsair we'll slap it on one of your trucks then you see how it does. If it bites, we get our money back. If it works, you'd be a fool not to pay the rest of us our shares and keep the thing. Then we all rush out and buy one. win-win, right? :)

edit: ok I just found the mud post http://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-tech/200967-better-gas-mileage-tuning-2.html. So $1000 for the thing, then a "professional" install? I'm a little fuzzy there, I'm not sure my mechanic has been to this seminar yet. Anyway, I'm in for a bill if 9 of you other guys are, let's put one in Jeff's LX.

:lmao:

Sorry, I didn't link to the thread 'cuz I was hoping the poster will start up a dedicated thread. I'm always skeptical of this crap but the poster seems to be gung-ho on it and plans to install it in his 80 and provide test data...We'll see. He "claims" to have installed it in other vehicles already. It would be :cool: to get a 50% increase in gas mileage. It would be even :cool:er to get a 100%+ increase like some of the claims state. I was going to watch from the sidelines to see what happens.

Honestly, my annual mileage is so low that it would take me 2+ years at the current gas prices to cover just the cost of the kit. I put together a quick and dirty spreadsheet that lets you input your MPG and fuel price figures for comparison (see below).

Cost as I understand it is the $1000 + installation. The guy said you can install it yourself but if you do the $$ back guarantee is voided. Guess they plan on certifying places to do the installs or something :confused:. Maybe Robbie would be interested? Maybe Christo could get Slee certified :D.

As for putting one in the LX...No can do. I have 18 months or so left on the extended warranty (yeah, shoot me but I had HG paranoia at time of purchase) and I'm pretty sure they'd probably frown on me doing this :rolleyes:.

Now I do have a '97 FZJ80 we could experiment on though :hill:. Just don't tell the :Princess:

art hog
03-18-2008, 11:09 PM
Would it work on a 4BT cummins? I could use 30-40mpg. And what would happen with running greasel?

DaveInDenver
03-18-2008, 11:34 PM
Water cracking for fuel, eh? I can't quite put my finger on what's bugging me about this.

Hydrogen by aqueous electrolysis:
H2O + 447 kJ/mol → H2 + 0.5 O2
Breaking water into its elements takes about 120 watt-hours to split 1 mol of water. This reaction is quite endothermic. BTW, creating 1kg of H2 from water takes about 60,000 watt-hours by electrolysis and the general rule of thumb is 1kg of hydrogen is the same energy equivalent as 1 gallon of gas. If you assume it costs $0.25 per kw-hr from the power company, creating the energy equivalent of 1 gallon of gasoline by breaking water into hydrogen would cost about $15 for that 60 kw-hr.

Creating hydrogen by carbon monoxide and water through inorganic gas-water shift reaction:
CO + H2O → CO2 + H2 + 40.4 kJ/mol
Now this reaction is slightly exothermic, but has to be done at high temperatures, at least 130 degrees C. Something strikes me wrong about this, just not sure what. It's often considered non-economical because of the high heat required for the reaction, but I just dunno. Also this already happens in the catalytic converter, so you'd have to change that and the EPA and CARB isn't gonna like not having the nitrogen oxides converted into N2 and O2. Hmmm, what am I missing? Regretting that I slept through chem in summer session, too.

powderpig
03-19-2008, 06:56 AM
Interesting stuff, I did respond to the Mechanics for install ad. I will see what is intailed to become a install and possiably a "tuner". Maybe it is snake oil, maybe not. I will spend more time on this later and give you feed back as time rolls on. I know If I got better Fuel milage from the cruiser, I would drive it more than I do now. For now, it is the Saab.
Anyhow, thanks Dave for showing how much energy it takes to break down water into it componets.

DaveInDenver
03-19-2008, 07:48 AM
Letting it rattle around some more, I think what doesn't seem right is the claims of fuel economy increase. Going from 22MPG to 60MPG? Uh, yeah, if that was possible why wouldn't the manufacturers be all over it? Probably the vast conspiracy to keep us all suckling at the teet of crude oil. OK, there might be some of that, but at least one manufacturer would buck the system and try to corner the market. Color me very skeptical. There just isn't that much energy left in the exhaust, certainly not enough to see 300% increases in economy. Even an old 22R-E or 3FE uses an O2 sensor and is trying to stay close to stoichiometric balance and our engines already do some of this with EGR, which helps with burned HC.

Chris
03-19-2008, 08:40 AM
Letting it rattle around some more, I think what doesn't seem right is the claims of fuel economy increase. Going from 22MPG to 60MPG? Uh, yeah, if that was possible why wouldn't the manufacturers be all over it? Probably the vast conspiracy to keep us all suckling at the teet of crude oil.

You're right on there, if it worked to the degree mentioned manufacturers would be all over it. This whole conspiracy to keep fuel economy under wraps by the powers that be has been around since forever. It's fun to think about but so is thinking Jimmy Hoffa is alive and well.

corsair23
03-19-2008, 10:43 AM
Letting it rattle around some more, I think what doesn't seem right is the claims of fuel economy increase. Going from 22MPG to 60MPG?....Color me very skeptical. There just isn't that much energy left in the exhaust, certainly not enough to see 300% increases in economy.

Agreed, which is why I want to watch from the sidelines to see what happens and get some hard data and hopefully real life unbiased testing on an 80. I certainly wouldn't mind being a test subject (assuming someone can tell me this won't cause my engine to melt down) but I don't plan to send them $1K for some snake oil technology...

That would be :cool: if Robbie got "certified" and proved this stuff really worked :thumb:

DaveInDenver
03-19-2008, 11:01 AM
assuming someone can tell me this won't cause my engine to melt down
If you assume that the amount of H2 produced is not really significant, then I don't think you'll do anything that the ECU and ignition advance won't be able to deal with. My guess is the main immediate concern would be not passing the tailpipe emissions tests anymore. While the catalytic converter prefers a slightly lean condition for the oxidation reactions, if you lean out too much the reductions won't be balanced. At a slightly rich condition, the NOx reduction is favored and if you are abnormally lean then you might not reduce enough NOx and that could fail your test. I'd have guessed on an 80 series with an O2 sensor after the cat that the ECU would run rich to keep the reactions balanced and so that would compensate out any MPG gains you might get from introducing hydrogen into the intake. A single O2 sensor system would just be shooting for 14.7~14.8 stoichiometry and so adding fuel into the intake might make the ECU dial back the fuel injectors, that seems logical I guess.

The unburned HC oxidation
8325

Carbon Monoxide oxidation
8326

Nitrogen reduction (this is the NOx)
8327

corsair23
03-19-2008, 11:19 AM
:bowdown:

Dave, I don't understand half of what you post but it makes fascinating reading non the less :thumb:

On the ECU issue, if I read correctly (in the thread on MUD or at the website), their is a piggy backed ECU somewhere in the mix that may handle some of the issues I think you are talking about.

DaveInDenver
03-19-2008, 11:55 AM
:bowdown:

Dave, I don't understand half of what you post but it makes fascinating reading non the less :thumb:

On the ECU issue, if I read correctly (in the thread on MUD or at the website), their is a piggy backed ECU somewhere in the mix that may handle some of the issues I think you are talking about.
They aren't gonna undo thermodynamics with a piggy backed box, so all they can do is remap the fuel profile to compensate for anything their gizmo might do. Now that I think about that, I wonder if that's the key, their chip. Putting a hyper-economy aggressive fuel map into the ECU would make your MPG skyrocket, although it would be like driving a 6,000 lbs Hilux with a 22R-E... S L O W. That could be the trick, you bolt on this $1,000 box that doesn't really do all that much, but with it you have to put this chip in to make it work. All the tricks are in the chip. It's like a distraction, watch this hand, watch this hand, as the other hand is liberating your of your wallet.

Rzeppa
03-19-2008, 06:36 PM
I know If I got better Fuel milage from the cruiser, I would drive it more than I do now. For now, it is the Saab.

Interesting - Both Robbie Antonsen (master mechanic and master wheeler) and Mark Whatley (master mechanic and master wheeler) wheel Land Cruisers and drive Saabs.

FWIW, I get a moving weighted average of 16 MPG in my 1971 FJ40 and 15 MPG in my 1978 FJ45. My wife says I'm a freak because I keep track of this stuuf. She has no idea what she gets in her 2001 VW bug with 1.8 turbo gasser. My best guess is around 21 MPG (she has a lead foot with the turbo).

Rzeppa
03-19-2008, 06:41 PM
and our engines already do some of this with EGR, which helps with burned HC.

Actually, that is not what the EGR is for. The purpose of the EGR is to reduce combustion temps, thus reducing NxOx. At our elevation, this is not an issue and all the EGR does is rob us of performance and fuel economy.

calphi27
03-19-2008, 07:26 PM
Interesting - Both Robbie Antonsen (master mechanic and master wheeler) and Mark Whatley (master mechanic and master wheeler) wheel Land Cruisers and drive Saabs.


Same here:cheers: I wish I was a master mechanic though.:(

nakman
05-18-2008, 09:57 PM
Jeff, looks like he got it installed. Good thing he wore his extra thick flame suit http://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-tech/222052-hafc-install-thread-mpg-increase.html

:popcorn:

corsair23
05-19-2008, 02:23 AM
Jeff, looks like he got it installed. Good thing he wore his extra thick flame suit http://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-tech/222052-hafc-install-thread-mpg-increase.html

:popcorn:


Good catch :thumb:

I found this statement below rather, shall we say interesting? 17.9mpg?? He is giving Chili a run for his $$ on best hwy mpg figures :)

I did my "orange test" today which is where we test the exact hwy MPG to get a baseline for the at least 50% gain or money back claim. this has to be performed exactly as the instructions say in order to get the money back if you end up needing it.

Mileage with cruise set at 65mph was 17.9mpg
I cannot test city mpg with the kit for the improvement because I cannot recreate the exact scenario due to traffic lights ect.

So guaranteed I will hit 8.9mpg better which is 26.8... lets see if I can hit that but I am planning on much more. I am setting my GOAL at 35mpg highway

powderpig
05-19-2008, 06:38 AM
I did contact the company a while back and got a reply to my inqury. They only wanted people with mechanical repair back ground(which I qualify for). School is a bit costly at over a 1k if you go to the installer and tuner school. Cost for kits is close to 1k dollars, with the install at 4-6 hrs at what ever labor rate you want to charge. there is the plasma system they have not put on the market yet, but will soon(what they say). Any interesting stuff, with not a lot of real hard science behind it. But lots of info in different areas with similar ideas. When things slow down I will look into this more. later Robbie

Crash
05-19-2008, 07:20 AM
Same here:cheers: I wish I was a master mechanic though.:(

That makes four of us - '96 Saab 9000. I'm in good company! I'm just the master of my dogs and I think they are only pretending to obey me. :D

Red_Chili
05-19-2008, 07:47 AM
I found this statement below rather, shall we say interesting? 17.9mpg?? He is giving Chili a run for his $$ on best hwy mpg figures :)
Yabut, in the interest of full disclosure, that was not normal driving. I was following hypermiler techniques, which involves a lot of coasting (wherever possible) and VERY leisurely acceleration. Barely touching the accelerator.

My normal driving technique has definitely changed however.

nakman
06-04-2008, 09:27 PM
Guys, since I couldn't be at the meeting tonight I wasted 30 minutes getting caught up on this thread. Permit me to paraphrase: lots more banter, more skepticism. Turns out he was using no correction for 35" tires and 4.88 gears, which as I definitely know yields higher than actual MPG. Also he was concerned that his O2 sensors were shot, but later learned he didn't know how to use his fancy scope thingy.

So now the truck is tuned, the O2 sensors verified, the consensus is "actual" MPG before was more like 15.. and supposedly he'll be posting up some good "after" numbers tonight. that said, you may now advance to page 5: http://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-tech/222052-hafc-install-thread-mpg-increase-5.html