Acetone said to increase mileage?
01-06-2006, 03:10 AM
#21
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 745
tomas... I would just like to point out... didn't you essentially arrive at the same conclusion as biznox in your first superlong post? (isn't it more like, you are right, but for the wrong reasons?)
And a have yet to see any real evidence given one way or another.
BTW, dowop... go for it, lol ... i'm all for experimenting...
so long as its other people doing it first
And a have yet to see any real evidence given one way or another.
BTW, dowop... go for it, lol ... i'm all for experimenting...
so long as its other people doing it first
01-06-2006, 03:22 AM
#22
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Delray Beach, FL
Posts: 361
Originally Posted by Tomas
Biz, just give it up. Most of your comments and opinions show little thought or understanding, and the only one you have made in this topic with checkable information content:
is incorrect.
The only difference in gasoline that would affect your fuel economy is oxygenation and all fuel in your metro area is going to be oxygenated the same according to time of year. Brand of gasoline affecting MPG is as ridiculous as claiming one brand gives you more horsepower than the other.
Which part of that is incorrect?
Please cite your sources.
01-06-2006, 04:34 AM
#23
That would be "...all fuel in your metro area is going to be oxygenated the same according to time of year."
01-06-2006, 04:39 AM
#24
Chimmy, no, not quite. That first 'long post' was to show using third party and personal information the contention that in a metro area all gasolines are the same. 
01-06-2006, 05:21 AM
#25
Senior Member
Scikotics
SL Member
Team N.V.S.
Scion Evolution
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Godfather
Posts: 1,164
My opinions of the articles presented:
8 out of 10
-great info
-citeable and repeatable experiments
-intelligently written (doesnt always mean correct, but see above) well thought through arguments
my opinons of this thread:
Tomas -
as always, you've cited good info, and i'll be getting a 'computer' soon to hook to my obdII to do some real testing as well
many others (you know who you are) ~
go find another thread, your arguments aren't helpful at all, (not that you need to be supportive of the thread, but you refute comments/statements/arguments with incoherant babble) just dumb logic
the research has been done quite well on many different levels.
i gotta say, anyone can improve on the engineers who built these cars, they are good, but they suck compared to the heights that capable and passionate engineers can take them too (have you seen the '06 xB center console? what f'kin idiot designed that? - not very engineerlike if you ask me)
GO RESEARCH! - knowledge is as far as you dare to reach.
8 out of 10
-great info
-citeable and repeatable experiments
-intelligently written (doesnt always mean correct, but see above) well thought through arguments
my opinons of this thread:
Tomas -
as always, you've cited good info, and i'll be getting a 'computer' soon to hook to my obdII to do some real testing as wellmany others (you know who you are) ~
go find another thread, your arguments aren't helpful at all, (not that you need to be supportive of the thread, but you refute comments/statements/arguments with incoherant babble) just dumb logicthe research has been done quite well on many different levels.
i gotta say, anyone can improve on the engineers who built these cars, they are good, but they suck compared to the heights that capable and passionate engineers can take them too (have you seen the '06 xB center console? what f'kin idiot designed that? - not very engineerlike if you ask me)
GO RESEARCH! - knowledge is as far as you dare to reach.
01-06-2006, 06:42 AM
#26
Senior Member
Scikotics
SL Member
Team N.V.S.
Scion Evolution
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Godfather
Posts: 1,164
anyone know if i could use an APEXi II unit to do similar things as the Scan Guage?
been reading up on the two, the Apexi seems like it'll require a bit more work on the install, then it may not log the way the scan guage does..
been reading up on the two, the Apexi seems like it'll require a bit more work on the install, then it may not log the way the scan guage does..
01-06-2006, 03:06 PM
#27
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 745
Originally Posted by Tomas
Chimmy, no, not quite. That first 'long post' was to show using third party and personal information the contention that in a metro area all gasolines are the same.
As for the acetone thing... I have no clue, and other than anecdotal evidence, there doesn't seem to be a way to substiate a claim either way.
I think i'd rather play it safe and not mess around with the stuff I put in my tank.
01-06-2006, 03:30 PM
#28
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 587
if it's controversial it's not happening to my car. i know for a fact that gas (by itself) works just fine.
01-06-2006, 04:04 PM
#29
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NOT HERE
Posts: 938
For those of you that are worried about adding acetone to your fuel, then don't try it.
But, do not use fuel injector cleaner either, acetone is the most prevelent chemical in them.
And those that are sceptical, use the search function and read the posts that others have done about it, research pays, most of those that have tried it have noticed an improvement to their mileage( about 7% increase) Every little bit helps now days.
And if you don't have proof that it harms anything or doesn't work by trying this yourself, don't start telling people that it doesn't help or damages your car.
Nay Sayers are a dime a dozen on this site, Remember the internet is a tool to be used.
But, do not use fuel injector cleaner either, acetone is the most prevelent chemical in them.
And those that are sceptical, use the search function and read the posts that others have done about it, research pays, most of those that have tried it have noticed an improvement to their mileage( about 7% increase) Every little bit helps now days.
And if you don't have proof that it harms anything or doesn't work by trying this yourself, don't start telling people that it doesn't help or damages your car.
Nay Sayers are a dime a dozen on this site, Remember the internet is a tool to be used.
01-06-2006, 07:10 PM
#30
Chimmy3, to some extent gasoline brands DO matter in some regions.
As an example, my mother's car has a much less sophisticated engine than the engines in Scions (a 1990 Ford Tempo with 56,000 original miles on it - yes she's the classic 'little old lady who drove it to church'), and notices fuel differences much more strongly. There are two brands locally that have consistantly given drivability problems with her car.
While her car even required a tank drain/system clean because of one of those brands, I've had vehicles at the same time that used the same fuel without problem (and others that displayed problems).
Both these brands are 'national brands' with accepted, recognized names - and both come from the same refinery and oil stock. There are two other national brands here that seem to never give problems for anyone's vehicle.
Not only are the additive packages different between these four brands (detergents and such), there are obviously other more basic differences in these fuels. The most problem prone brand, based on personal experience and newpaper articles, has consistantly higher oxygenator content, and often appears to have water and other contaminant problems. The top grade output from that refinery even looks and smells different from the lowest grade.
(Local boaters know NOT to use some fuels in their engines because they appear to suck water right out of the air, too.)
The local 'low grade' national brand brand is very popular with those having vehicles that will accept it because it is generally five cents a gallon cheaper than the 'top tier' brands on the same corners.
There is at least one other national brand from a local refinery that usually does not have problems (though it did last year to the extent that cars that used that fuel were being repaired at refinery expense and drivers were being given $20 bonuses for their trouble).
At least in this region, there are recognized and recognizable differences in gasoline brands. I won't go so far as to say one gets different horsepower from different brands other than to state the obvious: If a vehicle is running poorly on a given fuel, it's usable output is less, which obviously also affects milage...
A blanket statement that "all gasolines are the same" is, essentially, BS. In some regions that require marking fuels for some content, one can even choose between various levels of, for example, ethanol in the mix by changing brands. In some areas, like this one, where such marking is not required, it's a crap shoot.
The very narrow point where I agree with the 'brands don't matter' statement is in limited local markets where they really DON'T matter and all come out of the same vast vat and are served up in identical batches to local stations of different names. In those limited areas and circumstances "brands don't matter" may be a true statement, and the person saying that may be in one of those areas.
In the rest of the country, each grade of each brand can be a unique mix of basic fuels, additives and extras. Here the detergent and dye packages are different between MOST brands. The choice of oxygenator type and quantity differs between brands and even grades in the same brand. Some national brands, locally, are of questionable quality and consistancy. Other brands are consistantly without problems. It has even been shown and accepted that locally some fuels cause more corrosion of fuel system parts. There are real differences.
As an example, my mother's car has a much less sophisticated engine than the engines in Scions (a 1990 Ford Tempo with 56,000 original miles on it - yes she's the classic 'little old lady who drove it to church'), and notices fuel differences much more strongly. There are two brands locally that have consistantly given drivability problems with her car.
While her car even required a tank drain/system clean because of one of those brands, I've had vehicles at the same time that used the same fuel without problem (and others that displayed problems).
Both these brands are 'national brands' with accepted, recognized names - and both come from the same refinery and oil stock. There are two other national brands here that seem to never give problems for anyone's vehicle.
Not only are the additive packages different between these four brands (detergents and such), there are obviously other more basic differences in these fuels. The most problem prone brand, based on personal experience and newpaper articles, has consistantly higher oxygenator content, and often appears to have water and other contaminant problems. The top grade output from that refinery even looks and smells different from the lowest grade.
(Local boaters know NOT to use some fuels in their engines because they appear to suck water right out of the air, too.)
The local 'low grade' national brand brand is very popular with those having vehicles that will accept it because it is generally five cents a gallon cheaper than the 'top tier' brands on the same corners.
There is at least one other national brand from a local refinery that usually does not have problems (though it did last year to the extent that cars that used that fuel were being repaired at refinery expense and drivers were being given $20 bonuses for their trouble).
At least in this region, there are recognized and recognizable differences in gasoline brands. I won't go so far as to say one gets different horsepower from different brands other than to state the obvious: If a vehicle is running poorly on a given fuel, it's usable output is less, which obviously also affects milage...
A blanket statement that "all gasolines are the same" is, essentially, BS. In some regions that require marking fuels for some content, one can even choose between various levels of, for example, ethanol in the mix by changing brands. In some areas, like this one, where such marking is not required, it's a crap shoot.
The very narrow point where I agree with the 'brands don't matter' statement is in limited local markets where they really DON'T matter and all come out of the same vast vat and are served up in identical batches to local stations of different names. In those limited areas and circumstances "brands don't matter" may be a true statement, and the person saying that may be in one of those areas.
In the rest of the country, each grade of each brand can be a unique mix of basic fuels, additives and extras. Here the detergent and dye packages are different between MOST brands. The choice of oxygenator type and quantity differs between brands and even grades in the same brand. Some national brands, locally, are of questionable quality and consistancy. Other brands are consistantly without problems. It has even been shown and accepted that locally some fuels cause more corrosion of fuel system parts. There are real differences.
01-07-2006, 05:24 AM
#31
Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by Tomas
Chimmy3, to some extent gasoline brands DO matter in some regions.
...
There are real differences.
...
There are real differences.
01-09-2006, 03:56 PM
#32
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by Tomas
Clorox, that site has a lot of interesting information, and is written by an engineer with experience in gasoline engines.
A lot of his opinions (they are opinions, since not 'proved' by empirical testing) are based on 'contradictions' in other person's opinions. While this can be (and is) a telling feature of many people's opinions, he is not immune himself from contradictions in his statements about fuel use.
For example, in one place he says
and in another
In my regional market there is WIDE variation in alcohol content 'at the pump' between brands, especially in winter. While in one statement he grandly dismisses the possibility of there being more than a 1-2% difference in fuel economy between tanks in the other he equates an "E10" mix (used by some suppliers in some fuels in this area) with an automatic 3-4% difference...
While I give his opinions great weight (I've read his stuff before) he is not without error. There are some others who have other opinions. In each case I weigh the opinions and the support they have for them (if any), and form my own opinions. Bottom line, however, a lot of what I believe is based on personal experience.
If I actually 'see' it, I tend to believe it. If I do not, I hold it as 'theory.' Right now I am doing some empirical testing on acetone. I don't honestly expect it to make a difference. What I 'see' for myself will be the basis for my final opinion.
Thanks for the link! It's all about continuing to learn. :D
Er, speaking of links, here's a link to the "problem" with some gasoline that affected several thousand vehicles in this area in early 2005 that I mentioned in an earlier post: http://tijil.org/badgas01.html. As I was saying, not all gas is equal, even in a limited regional area.
A lot of his opinions (they are opinions, since not 'proved' by empirical testing) are based on 'contradictions' in other person's opinions. While this can be (and is) a telling feature of many people's opinions, he is not immune himself from contradictions in his statements about fuel use.
For example, in one place he says
As an aside, some commentators suggest that different petrols can give wildly different fuel consumption (gas mileage), maybe as much as 50% between the best and worst. I find this exceptionally unlikely - the critical parameters such as density, energy content, boiling curve, etc are pretty closely controlled in all highly developed countries, and so unless you get a "defective" batch I just cannot see how there can be this sort of spread (1 or 2 percent, yes, but 50%, no). To my mind, it is far more likely that the natural variability in fuel economy is responsible for the observed variations.
The conspiracy theorists say that adding ethanol makes fuel consumption worse, and imply this is part of a plot to increase oil usage.
In one sense, this is quite right, but no mysterious "anti-economy" properties are required to explain this. Quite simply, ethanol has not much more than half the energy content of gasoline, and so a 10% ethanol mix will give (typically) about 3-4% worse economy.
In one sense, this is quite right, but no mysterious "anti-economy" properties are required to explain this. Quite simply, ethanol has not much more than half the energy content of gasoline, and so a 10% ethanol mix will give (typically) about 3-4% worse economy.
While I give his opinions great weight (I've read his stuff before) he is not without error. There are some others who have other opinions. In each case I weigh the opinions and the support they have for them (if any), and form my own opinions. Bottom line, however, a lot of what I believe is based on personal experience.
If I actually 'see' it, I tend to believe it.
If I do not, I hold it as 'theory.' Right now I am doing some empirical testing on acetone. I don't honestly expect it to make a difference. What I 'see' for myself will be the basis for my final opinion.Thanks for the link! It's all about continuing to learn. :D
Er, speaking of links, here's a link to the "problem" with some gasoline that affected several thousand vehicles in this area in early 2005 that I mentioned in an earlier post: http://tijil.org/badgas01.html. As I was saying, not all gas is equal, even in a limited regional area.
01-09-2006, 11:44 PM
#33
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Delray Beach, FL
Posts: 361
Fascinating stuff...
You know if you switched to 155 series Honda Insight tires and aired them up to 80 psi you could probably get another 1 mpg. Then maybe you could fit a sail on the roof to catch tailwinds for another 0.0005 mpg.
If you're this obsessed, common sense says get a Prius. Then you can stare unblinkingly at the computerized MPG display, eyes watering, while obsessively trying not to touch the gas pedal as you drive down the road. Then when you get home you can count the tiles on your bathroom floor a couple of hundred times.
You know if you switched to 155 series Honda Insight tires and aired them up to 80 psi you could probably get another 1 mpg. Then maybe you could fit a sail on the roof to catch tailwinds for another 0.0005 mpg.
If you're this obsessed, common sense says get a Prius. Then you can stare unblinkingly at the computerized MPG display, eyes watering, while obsessively trying not to touch the gas pedal as you drive down the road. Then when you get home you can count the tiles on your bathroom floor a couple of hundred times.
01-10-2006, 01:28 AM
#34
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Just to the right of Hell
Posts: 495
Originally Posted by Biznox
Fascinating stuff...
You know if you switched to 155 series Honda Insight tires and aired them up to 80 psi you could probably get another 1 mpg. Then maybe you could fit a sail on the roof to catch tailwinds for another 0.0005 mpg.
If you're this obsessed, common sense says get a Prius. Then you can stare unblinkingly at the computerized MPG display, eyes watering, while obsessively trying not to touch the gas pedal as you drive down the road. Then when you get home you can count the tiles on your bathroom floor a couple of hundred times.
You know if you switched to 155 series Honda Insight tires and aired them up to 80 psi you could probably get another 1 mpg. Then maybe you could fit a sail on the roof to catch tailwinds for another 0.0005 mpg.
If you're this obsessed, common sense says get a Prius. Then you can stare unblinkingly at the computerized MPG display, eyes watering, while obsessively trying not to touch the gas pedal as you drive down the road. Then when you get home you can count the tiles on your bathroom floor a couple of hundred times.
01-10-2006, 04:39 PM
#35
Senior Member
SL Member
Scion Evolution
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dublin, CA
Posts: 560
So if I put premium in, what will....????
J/K
Thomas, do your thing man! I like that you are willing to try.
For anyone else who is bashing... stay off the Scionlife site in general. We're here based on these vehicles in one way or another. So if someone is tinkering... let them.
J/K
Thomas, do your thing man! I like that you are willing to try.
For anyone else who is bashing... stay off the Scionlife site in general. We're here based on these vehicles in one way or another. So if someone is tinkering... let them.
01-11-2006, 07:25 AM
#36
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2
Hi guys, noticed a lot of traffic to my site from here and thought I'd pay a visit...
Good point! I was writing from a European perspective, and we don't have ethanol in gasoline. I'll increase the "plausible amount of variability" slightly when I next update the page.
Though to be fair to me, 3 - 4% variation (from E10) is much, much closer to the 1 - 2% I said was reasonable, than to the 50% some people claim. That claim still seems wildly implausible, and I don't see any evidence here to the contrary.
Also I have to say, the critical point that there simply is not (contrary to Louis LaPointe's opinion) more than 1 - 2% economy loss through unburnt fuel in the exhaust (the mechanism by which acetone is supposed to work) is proven by empirical evidence.
Any other feedback / corrections most welcome!
Tony[/b]
Originally Posted by Tomas
A lot of his opinions (they are opinions, since not 'proved' by empirical testing) are based on 'contradictions' in other person's opinions. While this can be (and is) a telling feature of many people's opinions, he is not immune himself from contradictions in his statements about fuel use.
For example, in one place he says
and in another
For example, in one place he says
As an aside, some commentators suggest that different petrols can give wildly different fuel consumption (gas mileage), maybe as much as 50% between the best and worst. I find this exceptionally unlikely - the critical parameters such as density, energy content, boiling curve, etc are pretty closely controlled in all highly developed countries, and so unless you get a "defective" batch I just cannot see how there can be this sort of spread (1 or 2 percent, yes, but 50%, no). To my mind, it is far more likely that the natural variability in fuel economy is responsible for the observed variations.
The conspiracy theorists say that adding ethanol makes fuel consumption worse, and imply this is part of a plot to increase oil usage.
In one sense, this is quite right, but no mysterious "anti-economy" properties are required to explain this. Quite simply, ethanol has not much more than half the energy content of gasoline, and so a 10% ethanol mix will give (typically) about 3-4% worse economy.
In one sense, this is quite right, but no mysterious "anti-economy" properties are required to explain this. Quite simply, ethanol has not much more than half the energy content of gasoline, and so a 10% ethanol mix will give (typically) about 3-4% worse economy.
Good point! I was writing from a European perspective, and we don't have ethanol in gasoline. I'll increase the "plausible amount of variability" slightly when I next update the page.Though to be fair to me, 3 - 4% variation (from E10) is much, much closer to the 1 - 2% I said was reasonable, than to the 50% some people claim. That claim still seems wildly implausible, and I don't see any evidence here to the contrary.
Also I have to say, the critical point that there simply is not (contrary to Louis LaPointe's opinion) more than 1 - 2% economy loss through unburnt fuel in the exhaust (the mechanism by which acetone is supposed to work) is proven by empirical evidence.
Any other feedback / corrections most welcome!
Tony[/b]
01-11-2006, 08:33 AM
#37
Hi, Tony! Glad to have you aboard!
Here in this strange inward-looking part of the planet we also have fuels up to "E85" readily available at the pump in some regions (notably the Midwest, but other areas, also).
In my local area the one 'national brand' that appears to cause more problems than all others combined, with some engines, used to claim "E15" to "E20" when such markings were required by law. My suspicion is that they have continued to include higher percentages of ethanol than the other brands, but these days the labeling is not required...
If I recall what little I know of current three-way catalyst technology correctly, a certain amount of unburned fuel is necessary for them to work up to their best potential in their 'second stage,' so many of the 'reasons' given by Louis for improved fuel milage by adding tiny amounts of acetone are, to say the least, questionable.
On the other hand, the idea of better/quicker fuel spread (finer mist) in the combustion chamber is intriguing enough to bear some expirimentation... If nothing else it conceivably could improve power delivery just enough to make a measurable difference. (Unlikely? Yeah.)
I don't expect to 'prove' one way or the other if there is any positive or negative effect from miniscule amounts of acetone added to the fuel - at least not enough to convince anyone but myself. I CERTAINLY don't expect to be able to say why or why not in respect to any results I may come up with.
As to my comments on the contradiction in your info, Tony, I will grant that while the 3-4% is much closer to the 1-2% you suggested than it is to 50%, it still represents what, a 200% difference?
(I know, I know, at that low a percentage that is STILL within the margin of error for most testing methods. I'm just poking at you.)
I didn't realize that your pages were Euro-centric, but knowing that now, I can readily see where the discrepancy crept in.
Thanks for stopping by, Tony, and if we can help to make your pages more bullitproof by tightening up details, we've actually acomplished something worthwhile already. :D
(As an aside, isn't it amazing how watching server logs can lead one into totally unexpected fora? The information on your pages and your participation in this small discussion are very welcome, and I'm sure I speak for others when I say I was very surprised to have you drop in!)
Here in this strange inward-looking part of the planet we also have fuels up to "E85" readily available at the pump in some regions (notably the Midwest, but other areas, also).
In my local area the one 'national brand' that appears to cause more problems than all others combined, with some engines, used to claim "E15" to "E20" when such markings were required by law. My suspicion is that they have continued to include higher percentages of ethanol than the other brands, but these days the labeling is not required...
If I recall what little I know of current three-way catalyst technology correctly, a certain amount of unburned fuel is necessary for them to work up to their best potential in their 'second stage,' so many of the 'reasons' given by Louis for improved fuel milage by adding tiny amounts of acetone are, to say the least, questionable.
On the other hand, the idea of better/quicker fuel spread (finer mist) in the combustion chamber is intriguing enough to bear some expirimentation... If nothing else it conceivably could improve power delivery just enough to make a measurable difference. (Unlikely? Yeah.)
I don't expect to 'prove' one way or the other if there is any positive or negative effect from miniscule amounts of acetone added to the fuel - at least not enough to convince anyone but myself. I CERTAINLY don't expect to be able to say why or why not in respect to any results I may come up with.
As to my comments on the contradiction in your info, Tony, I will grant that while the 3-4% is much closer to the 1-2% you suggested than it is to 50%, it still represents what, a 200% difference?
(I know, I know, at that low a percentage that is STILL within the margin of error for most testing methods. I'm just poking at you.)
I didn't realize that your pages were Euro-centric, but knowing that now, I can readily see where the discrepancy crept in.
Thanks for stopping by, Tony, and if we can help to make your pages more bullitproof by tightening up details, we've actually acomplished something worthwhile already. :D
(As an aside, isn't it amazing how watching server logs can lead one into totally unexpected fora? The information on your pages and your participation in this small discussion are very welcome, and I'm sure I speak for others when I say I was very surprised to have you drop in!)
01-11-2006, 09:26 AM
#38
Senior Member
Scikotics
SL Member
Team N.V.S.
Scion Evolution
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Godfather
Posts: 1,164
I'm actually not done with my first tank since the intro of acetone to it, but part of my experiment is to do a maximum of 70mph, 75 passing on freeway trips, though in town ppl drive 60.. i continue to go with the flow, accelerating about as hard as i usually do, generally smooth, some spikes to keep with traffic,
ive noticed about 2mpg better around the 1/2 tank mark... i should be filling up in a day or two, so i'll most definately post the results.
ive noticed about 2mpg better around the 1/2 tank mark... i should be filling up in a day or two, so i'll most definately post the results.
01-11-2006, 10:11 AM
#39
Senior Member
Team Sushi
SL Member
Team N.V.S.
Scion Evolution
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 4,322
Originally Posted by Biznox
Fascinating stuff...
You know if you switched to 155 series Honda Insight tires and aired them up to 80 psi you could probably get another 1 mpg. Then maybe you could fit a sail on the roof to catch tailwinds for another 0.0005 mpg.
If you're this obsessed, common sense says get a Prius. Then you can stare unblinkingly at the computerized MPG display, eyes watering, while obsessively trying not to touch the gas pedal as you drive down the road. Then when you get home you can count the tiles on your bathroom floor a couple of hundred times.
You know if you switched to 155 series Honda Insight tires and aired them up to 80 psi you could probably get another 1 mpg. Then maybe you could fit a sail on the roof to catch tailwinds for another 0.0005 mpg.
If you're this obsessed, common sense says get a Prius. Then you can stare unblinkingly at the computerized MPG display, eyes watering, while obsessively trying not to touch the gas pedal as you drive down the road. Then when you get home you can count the tiles on your bathroom floor a couple of hundred times.
But so far, I can't find any fault in the articles Tomas cited. However the results I've noticed myself have been stagnant (relative to $ spent and MPG increased). So far, I've seen an average increase in MPG, but it hasn't always netted me more money (but it has on one or two fill ups).
01-11-2006, 10:20 AM
#40
I'm sorry, Sid, was Biznox flaming me? 
If he was, he should probably stop that, since its against the rules we all agreed to when we were allowed to post at ScionLife.
I actually thought he was just being incredibly annoying.
Guess it's a good thing I'm not more sensitive to the nuances or I'd have to warn him, eh? :D
If he was, he should probably stop that, since its against the rules we all agreed to when we were allowed to post at ScionLife.
I actually thought he was just being incredibly annoying.
Guess it's a good thing I'm not more sensitive to the nuances or I'd have to warn him, eh? :D