Hafc Install Thread! (mpg Increase?!)

[Beowulf]

Originally Posted by e9999

What is the alternative? Somebody posts that for a $1,000 they can make your 80 fly and everybody should just say OK or nothing at all and leave it at that? One could easily argue that ethically we have an obligation to speak up, in fact, if there is a chance this would help somebody avoid losing money.

Exactly!

And guys, PLEASE, if you are going to post your damn MPG numbers then do us all a favor and post ADJUSTED numbers that factor in your over/under-sized tyres, and your re-gearing, and learn how to accurately calculate MPG. Bogus numbers do nobody any good and this is really simple grade school math.

-B-

[lx450landcruiser]

Originally Posted by e9999

What is the alternative? Somebody posts that for a $1,000 they can make your 80 fly and everybody should just say OK or nothing at all and leave it at that? One could easily argue that ethically we have an obligation to speak up, in fact, if there is a chance this would help somebody avoid losing money.

[ed97fzj80]

Originally Posted by Riad

mmmm... may be. See my sig for tire info. I fill up every week. My MPG range is from 16.5 to 17.5. When I go wheeling, it drops to as low as 13 (+/-)MPG. I had never got 18 before but at this point I am happy with any thing better that 14 MPG.

I ran your tires at the miata.net tire calculator and they are darn close to stock. The difference is nominally about 1% positive -- IOW if everything is on the numbers, your mileage is actually 1% better than what you are recording.

[Riad]

Originally Posted by ed97fzj80

I ran your tires at the miata.net tire calculator and they are darn close to stock. The difference is nominally about 1% positive -- IOW if everything is on the numbers, your mileage is actually 1% better than what you are recording.

Well those calculators don't really factor every thing in IMHO. What I have gathered from my experience thus far is: if I drive 90 mph every day 5 days of the week (that includes drifting), I can burn out 20 gallons of gas (or more) in let's say about 200 miles (or less). The tire size does not make much of a difference in that case. My wife's 04 4Runner (100% stock) behaves the same way except instead of 200 miles, it does 280 miles figuratively speaking. Like I said, I am happy with what I get, for now. The Hafc stuff is simply not ready for prime time yet IMHO but if you are benefitting from it, kudos to you. End of the day what matters (only to you) is how much you have saved in gas.

[ed97fzj80]

Originally Posted by Riad

Well those calculators don't really factor every thing in IMHO. What I have gathered from my experience thus far is: if I drive 90 mph every day 5 days of the week (that includes drifting), I can burn out 20 gallons of gas (or more) in let's say about 200 miles (or less). The tire size does not make much of a difference in that case. My wife's 04 4Runner (100% stock) behaves the same way except instead of 200 miles, it does 280 miles figuratively speaking. Like I said, I am happy with what I get, for now. The Hafc stuff is simply not ready for prime time yet IMHO but if you are benefitting from it, kudos to you. End of the day what matters (only to you) is how much you have saved in gas.

They only factor in differences in nominal tire size, and, in response to a question about how much difference your aftermarket tires might be making in your mileage calcs, that's all I was attempting to address. I have no clue why you're talking to me about drifting and other bad driving habits in this context, except that maybe I should have quoted the questioning post instead of yours. backatcha

[Riad]

Originally Posted by ed97fzj80

They only factor in differences in nominal tire size, and, in response to a question about how much difference your aftermarket tires might be making in your mileage calcs, that's all I was attempting to address. I have no clue why you're talking to me about drifting and other bad driving habits in this context, except that maybe I should have quoted the questioning post instead of yours. backatcha

Well I mentioned them in this context because those are the kind of factors usually excluded from the tire size+mpg calculators. These factors do effect MPG in addition to poor/better engine condition. When they are excluded, most likely the result is not going to be accurate. That's all. Didn't mean to come at ya any other way.

[WildHare]

Originally Posted by e9999

I strongly agree that insults and personally offensive comments have no place regardless of the nature of the thread. But arguing civilly about the technical merits of claims made here in public is perfectly appropriate IMHO....

What is the alternative? Somebody posts that for a $1,000 they can make your 80 fly and everybody should just say OK or nothing at all and leave it at that? One could easily argue that ethically we have an obligation to speak up, in fact, if there is a chance this would help somebody avoid losing money.

I completely and wholeheartedly agree. I find it doubtful that a single man or a small group could independently discover methods for improving combustion engine efficiency while maintaining drivability, maintenance schedules, cost, and especially reliability, that have eluded scientists and the automotive industry for decades. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Given that he does not submit his equipment for independent verification, even though the HFAC system is in the marketplace, is very suspicious. It seems as if he's hiding something.

I comment in this thread to encourage caution. Many is the person who will sell a miracle for a dollar. Before buying, give it some time and see if the sunshine of honest review will or won't evaporate his claims.

[snowcruiser]

Ignore the critique SS and please keep posting your results. There are a lot of spectators!

[ed97fzj80]

I feel adequately warned.

[Rusty55]

Originally Posted by WildHare

I completely and wholeheartedly agree. I find it doubtful that a single man or a small group could independently discover methods for improving combustion engine efficiency while maintaining drivability, maintenance schedules, cost, and especially reliability, that have eluded scientists and the automotive industry for decades. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Given that he does not submit his equipment for independent verification, even though the HFAC system is in the marketplace, is very suspicious. It seems as if he's hiding something.

I comment in this thread to encourage caution. Many is the person who will sell a miracle for a dollar. Before buying, give it some time and see if the sunshine of honest review will or won't evaporate his claims.

Do you really think that they (automotive and big oil) Don't have the technology to get 50-100 mpg suv, pick-up or something to that effect. I own a 1968 F-350 that gets 14 mpg. You cannot tell me that with the way technology evolves that my 2007 chevy should be getting 75 mpg.

[lx450landcruiser]

Originally Posted by ed97fzj80

I feel adequately warned.

seriously

[nicholas]

Originally Posted by ed97fzj80

I feel adequately warned.

I agree, it seems a bit snake oil-ish to me. Kind of like those guys who would travel town to town and sell cures for everything out of their wagons.

[nicholas]

..........

[e9999]

the proof is in the pudding, as they say...

so let's see some real solid and accurate test numbers



(you'll find a bunch of tests by the EPA on various devices -not this one I think- at Gas Saving and Emission Reduction Devices Evaluation | Cars and Light Trucks | US EPA and other places)

[Atoyot1031]

Originally Posted by Rusty55

Do you really think that they (automotive and big oil) Don't have the technology to get 50-100 mpg suv, pick-up or something to that effect.

Yes, I really think that.

[decavo]

Originally Posted by nicholas

I agree, it seems a bit snake oil-ish to me. Kind of like those guys who would travel town to town and sell cures for everything out of their wagons.

that is what I do for a living do do not knock it.. <high jack over>

Did any one see the news clip about a hydrogen/water car that was being marketed to a Japanese auto maker?

I also believe that the auto industry would kill or get rid of any other technology . Not fossil fuel related look at the jobs lost from such of a move..

I for one found a unit for 395 buck and plans to make my own for 10 bucks .. i am going to try it out also.. If it work great if not I will cry in my snake oil...

[EricG]

Originally Posted by Rusty55

Do you really think that they (automotive and big oil) Don't have the technology to get 50-100 mpg suv, pick-up or something to that effect.

Yes I do. What possible reason could the auto industry have for supressing this technology for decades. And by the auto industry I mean hundreds or thousands of independent manufacturers, private, academic and goverment research groups, etc. located all over the world.

Why would they conceal this? It would be an enormous competative advantage - if not in the US where gas has been dirt cheap forever, then around the rest of the world where it hasn't been for a long time. And with CAFE standards, it's even important in the US - what manufacturer wouldn't want to market vehicles twice as big and powerful as their competitors while still meeting the CAFE regulations?

Wait - "Big Oil" right? Big Oil is supressing the truth.

Really - a decades long conspiracy involving hundreds of companies and research groups in a highly competative industry where every one of them has enormous incentive to produce this magical engine. Sorry, I don't believe it.

I own a 1968 F-350 that gets 14 mpg. You cannot tell me that with the way technology evolves that my 2007 chevy should be getting 75 mpg.

Why, because your PC has gone from 200MHz to 2000MHz in less then 10 years? Sorry, progress in IC engine technology just doesn't scale that way - it's a very mature technology. See if Moore's Law still holds 100 years from now.

[alex4640]

Originally Posted by e9999

(you'll find a bunch of tests by the EPA on various devices -not this one I think- at Gas Saving and Emission Reduction Devices Evaluation | Cars and Light Trucks | US EPA and other places)

e9999, that web site is really great. I've spent some time reading many of the reports. As a trained scientist, I understand the ease with which a person can unconsciously introduce bias into his results without malice or intent to deceive. This can happen even to experienced scientists (global warming? anyone?). It is amazing to see the number of people who were convinced their device was doing something. Fuel heating, fuel cooling, fuel "catalyzing", fuel magnets, PVC injections, air/fuel mix alterations, fuel additives etc. Many of them were even granted U.S. Patents, only to be proven completely useless by simple, impartial testing.

The end result of all those tests performed by the EPA? CHANGE YOUR OIL!! Good quality, clean oil gave 3.6% better fuel economy. For most of us that's 0.5 MPG. Nothing else came even close to that.

I'll wait for numbers on this device before I decide.

[nicholas]

Originally Posted by EricG

Yes I do. What possible reason could the auto industry have for supressing this technology for decades. And by the auto industry I mean hundreds or thousands of independent manufacturers, private, academic and goverment research groups, etc. located all over the world.

Why would they conceal this? It would be an enormous competative advantage - if not in the US where gas has been dirt cheap forever, then around the rest of the world where it hasn't been for a long time. And with CAFE standards, it's even important in the US - what manufacturer wouldn't want to market vehicles twice as big and powerful as their competitors while still meeting the CAFE regulations?

Wait - "Big Oil" right? Big Oil is supressing the truth.
Really - a decades long conspiracy involving hundreds of companies and research groups in a highly competative industry where every one of them has enormous incentive to produce this magical engine. Sorry, I don't believe it.



Why, because your PC has gone from 200MHz to 2000MHz in less then 10 years? Sorry, progress in IC engine technology just doesn't scale that way - it's a very mature technology. See if Moore's Law still holds 100 years from now.

I agree. I highly doubt that big oil is suppressing the scientific breakthroughs for the IC engine. I am also very skeptical of this 1000$ magical mod that promises great gains in fuel efficiency. I suppose I will be eating crow pie when some hard numbers are established that prove me wrong.

[nicholas]

Originally Posted by decavo

that is what I do for a living do do not knock it.. <high jack over>

Did any one see the news clip about a hydrogen/water car that was being marketed to a Japanese auto maker?

I also believe that the auto industry would kill or get rid of any other technology . Not fossil fuel related look at the jobs lost from such of a move..

I for one found a unit for 395 buck and plans to make my own for 10 bucks .. i am going to try it out also.. If it work great if not I will cry in my snake oil...

Well I suppose there is nothing wrong with a snake oil salesman that is just out to make an honest living. Sorry about the hijack.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised at the lengths big oil could go to suppress information and technology with the kind of money they can throw around. I know an engineer that said he fears for his life if he is ever able to make any significant advances in magnetic power technology.

[nicholas]

IIRC from my physics courses, one of the biggest problems with the efficiency of the IC engine is the huge loss of power due to heat. I thought I remember my professor saying that the modern IC engine is about as efficient as it can be.

Unless someone can figure out how to lower the power lost as heat, I believe the only significant answer to greater fuel economy is an alternate fuel source. And I don't mean corn ethanol. That has to be one of the biggest snake oil hoaxes in my lifetime. I can't believe how many people actually think that is the answer to our fossil fuel woes.

[mkfour]

Originally Posted by nicholas

IIRC from my physics courses, one of the biggest problems with the efficiency of the IC engine is the huge loss of power due to heat. I thought I remember my professor saying that the modern IC engine is about as efficient as it can be.

Unless someone can figure out how to lower the power lost as heat, I believe the only significant answer to greater fuel economy is an alternate fuel source. And I don't mean corn ethanol. That has to be one of the biggest snake oil hoaxes in my lifetime. I can't believe how many people actually think that is the answer to our fossil fuel woes.

This is a good series of videos (10) that goes over some aspects of using hydrogen as a fuel in an IC engine. I found it informative.

YouTube - Hydrogen Fuel - Engine Fundamentals #1

[jonheld]

Originally Posted by nicholas

And I don't mean corn ethanol. That has to be one of the biggest snake oil hoaxes in my lifetime. I can't believe how many people actually think that is the answer to our fossil fuel woes.

THANK YOU NICK! That REALLY needed to be said. At least by someone other than me.

[nicholas]