Better Gas Mileage

I don't think you quite understand our system. I have never said that our unit Vaporizes the fuel before getting to the injectors. Anyone in mechanics 101 knows that would create Vapor Lock. I think you need to go and read up on Reid Vapor Pressure. That again is the ability of a fuel going from a liquid to a gaseous state. This helps the injectors as you say to atomize the fuel better. I believe you are the one twisting things around to impress someone. You brought up the point of 20 psi in the fuel lines and that really has nothing to do with the RVP pressure we are talking about. Our company goal is to lower harmful exhaust emissions and by doing so we are creating a better performance of vehicles and save fuel in most cases. If you don't want to do anything you don't have to. It is your money. If you continue to do what you have always done you will continue to get what you have always gotten. I truly understand that it is hard for you to comprehend arguing about something you have no knowledge or experience with. That is why we have a money back guarantee. With over 30,000 units out in use we have had less than 1/2 of a percent in returns.
This includes the government agencies as well.
You are not really arguing if it works or not but more as to how exactly does it work. I am sure there are a lot of companies that would love to have that info.
And yes this product works great on ATV's and Motorcycles. 3 Actual dynos have been done by 3 different Harley Davidson test facilities. All three tests showed increases in hpr and torque. Of course to you these guys are just regular Joes off the street.
Good Night,
Ben

 

You didn't say they vaporized it before the injectors, I simply said that so you would'nt try and use that as your next excuse. You said the injectors vaporized the fuel.

I know exactly what vapor pressure is. Reid vapor pressure is simply a standardized method of measuring vapor pressure of gasoline.

The pressure in the fuel system has everything to do with vapor pressure, since if the fuel pressure isn't high enough, we get vapor lock.

Point is, Im right, you're wrong, and you're struggling with ways to try and make me look stupid. Stop trying to take these people's money and go somewhere else. All you do is try and say Im wrong (without any evidence), then go on about how much money everyone will save over the long run, so nobody notices you ignored what I said.

Thats the other thing all these gas mileage super products do. They tell you about small gains, always around 5%. Its only ~1 mpg better per tank. You'll save all your money over the long run. Most people drive a little nicer (placebo effect) after they put it on, enough that they get another 1 mpg better than usual. And since thats all the product claimed, it must work. (look at the tornado, those fuel magnets).

 

And as far as your dyno test of the harley. There are far too many ways to get more hp on a dyno that have nothing to do with the bike itself. Tighten the straps down, wait till the engine is warmer.... Play with the correction factors on the dyno. Hell, I could make a fat kid on a bicycle pull 100hp if I tried.

 

We need INFO! on better MPG for my money,not HP/Torque BS! I got all that I need for my uses! How about stick to the subject matter!

 

His claim is better gas mileage through more complete combustion. So he thinks that if he can prove a hp increase, it would have to be from the more complete combustion, which in turn would give you better mpg.

 

speedemon105 - You said you were a chemical engineer right? How does copper interact with gasoline in a chemical manner if so?

Lets say for argument sake this worked. The film says it never needs replacing but if the copper is chemically bonding with the fuel. Wouldn't that mean in time the copper will all be used up?

 

I have the degree, I actually own my own business installing home electronics (theater systems, lighting systems and so on). I couldn't stand to actually be a chemist as my job, I just finished the degree because it would have taken too long and too much money to change to something else. But anyways,

Copper acts as a catalyst to speed up the oxidation of the gasoline. Simply put, it speeds up the breakdown of the gasoline. In a catalysis reaction, the catalyst isn't used up (catalytic converter), it simply provides an intermediate step in the reaction, and once the reaction is done, the catalyst returns to its original state.

Copper has a single electron in its outer shell, which means a single copper atom is fairly reactive (thats why a penny never stays shiny for long). A copper copper bond isn't terribly strong either, as its not filling either atoms shell. Any atom that needs one electron to fill its outer shell will readily bond with copper. Hydrogen has 1 electron, and another will fill its outer shell. Gasoline is made of various hydrocarbons, molecules made up of hydrogen and carbon. The copper steals hydrogen from a hydrocarbon chain, breaking down the chain, then releases it to form less complex molecules. Hydrogen won't stay bonded to copper though, its not a strong enough bond. Once the bond breaks, the copper bonds back to the rest of the copper.

There, I think that makes sense. My brain hurts now. Long story short, whether this product works or not, it won't use up the copper.

 

Wow. That's the best explanation I have heard yet.

 

The funny part is followed along through the whole thing. I guess those chem class i took in college were usefully after all. HAHA

Though the condensed answer at the end would have worked.

So if this is all a chemical reaction how does the RVP get raised? if the fuel system is running at 20psi, would raising the RVP be the same as changing the injectors?

I am just trying to get a better understanding of how this is supposed to actually work. I am sceptically but open to the idea if this would work. But I like to know what is going on before I actual install it. Passing fuel through a copper cylinder to increase fuel burn still has me perplexed.

To my knowledge most modern cars are designed to produce maximum efficiency from fuel? Toyota has a marketing campaign that even says this though the trucks are not listed there. I am beginning to believe that this product is more for older cars and not modern ones.

 

The vapor pressure (forget the reid part, they're adding it in there to try and make it sound more complex than it is) gets raised because its breaking down the fuel ever so slightly.

Don't get to concerned with the 20 psi, thats just a guess of mine what the pressure is in the fuel system. It might be higher, though it won't be any less. As far as raising the pressure being the same as changing injectors, no. If you were to change the injectors, the main reasons are for higher flow, different dispersion patterns, better atomization, shorter duration of spray, stuff like that. Highly unlikely you would get better gas mileage from different injectors alone.

As far as you not being able to figure out how this is supposed to correspond to better gas mileage, well you're not going to. It won't raise the gas mileage. Thats been my point. They're changing a property of the gas (by a small amount) that can't change your gas mileage. They are planning on the fact that nobody will actually understand the science behind it. Which is why they won't ever give any real details behind how it works, it doesn't.

 

007 didn't you say that you had better throttle response with the eco thing installed?

 

I still have to ask for the data from independant sources on actual usage. I'm not saying that you will be proven wrong, I'm just saying that there is ALWAYS a chance that one might miss a contributing factor in this type of speculative analysis. Maybe the claim that it increases MPG is correct but their assumed cause is incorrect. I've seen it more than once where something happened and an incorrect assertion of cause was assumed by many to be fact.
Maybe it is this change in "a property of the gas" that is having some effect. If it's as little as 1/2 mpg it would be worth it in a year's time.
I'm firmly with the "wait and see the data" set.

 

I believe both 007 and Maverick both said they got a more responsive throttle response

 

Well said, i'm waiting for the real world results. I have serious doubts and i'm not holding my breath but with gas prices the way they are it's at least worth waiting to see what Mav and 007 have to say

 

The copper ever so slightly breaks down the gas. The reason we don't use copper gas lines is because it causes the gas to gum up faster. They are claiming this same process is giving you better gas mileage. You can achieve the same result by letting the gas sit in the tank for a couple weeks. Don't forget this is all supposed to be working by "more complete combustion". IT CAN'T HAPPEN. You're engine is running at the stoichiometric rate already, it is burning ALL the gas. The gas might not be completely broken down, but it has all been burnt. There isn't enough chemical energy left in the exhaust to give you any better gas mileage. If there was, your engine would be running rich, the O2 sensor would notice, and it would lean the engine out.

As far as waiting and seeing the data, until you can get the margin of error for your test method significantly less than the gain in mileage they are claiming, that test method can't reliably prove anything. They know that, and thats why he has been so heavily pushing the math on you about how even if it only makes a tiny difference it will pay for itself. You will have a tiny difference, you can't control your driving that well, and theres a 50% chance (actually a little better, placebo effect, you will most likely drive at least a fraction easier because you really want this to work) that difference will be positive, in which case you will buy the product.

That argument always works. Thats why its so common.

Anyways, Im done trying to convince people. Make up your own minds, its your money after all. If you have any questions I'll be glad to answer them.

 

+1 on your side unless I see something better.

This would help MPG in a little way but do you know of any reason why under driving the water pump and power steering on Toyota's has not been done yet? i under drive them on my M3 with no issues. I have been doing a lot of searches as well as talking on the other forums about this and everyone says it is a bad idea.

Are Toyota motors designed so different than any other motors out there to your knowledge?

This would free some wasted HP to the wheels hence less fuel need to move the truck and saves you MPG.

PS if anyone can get their hands on a set of STOCK water pump and power steering pulleys let me know. I need them to mock up a set of custom under drive ones.

 

Speedemon,

I am not a chemist, nor am I employed by eco-systems, I am just a Tacoma owner like everyone else on this board. I make my living as a short haul trucker, I pay for my gas just like everyone else, and if I decide to keep the device that is curently installed in my truck I will pay for it like anyone else.

I realize that you are not doing it intentionally, and that when you use the pronoun "they" I am sure that you are refering to the comapny eco-systems, but considering that there is only one employee of eco-systems posting here, and that 007tacoma and myself are just Tacoma owners who took time and money of our own to try to the best of our ability to test these devices and report on them to the rest of the members, I would appreciate it if you would be so kind as to refrain from using "they" in your posts, and instead use "the company" or "Eco-systems" or something like that. Please understand, that using "they" can lead some people to believe that 007 and myself are employees of or plants from the company, and that may un-fairly bias some people against our test results. I really don't care if anyone purchases the devices at the end of our test, but I would like to make sure that they get the chance to view our results in the un-biased and straight-forward manner that they will be presented. We have put a lot of time effort and money into these tests, and we'd just like them to be viewed on their own merits for what they are, (two guys with two trucks doing the best they can) and not viewed as propaganda.

I hope you can understand my point and where I am coming from.

Thank you.

 

Thank you both for giving us the oportunity to present our findings to you. I am sure I can speak for 007 as well as myself when I say it is appreciated.

 

I am not a chemist, nor do I pretend to understand all that you have said throughout your posts, though I am impressed as you are the first person to raise concerns and been able to back them up with science. If that science is correct or not... I have no opinion as I do not have the knowledge base to have an informed opinion, but I do appreciate reading more than "It's just snake oil."

That said, and I do not have any equations to back this up, but the Tacoma engines are set to run fairly rich from the factory. I can not remember how rich, perhaps Spyder if you're watching this thread you could help me out with that one, but Gadget, the guy in-charge of URD had an article that discussed just that information somewhere. Perhaps it is that chronic runnig rich from the factory that this device seeks to correct? Keep in mind that almost all manufacturers will set their engines to run rich, as running rich only costs fuel and power, where as if they set it to run leaner and something were off a continued lean out will destroy the engine and cost them money.

Perhaps, the eco devices also might change the point at which the fuel burns? Maybe the devices cause all the fuel to ignite sooner than it would under stock conditions, there-by freeing up more energy to push the piston, instead of the piston already being in motion as the remainder of the fuel is burning? Again this is just my speculation and trying to answer how the science you are quoting could still be correct, and yet the device still could work as advertised.

 

URD has underdrive pullys for some of the Tacoma motors http://www.urdusa.com, though right now I am not sure which motors, and which pullys, and it is past my bed time, so I'll leave the looking it up to you. As for why people say it is a bad idea, I had always heard that underdriving the waterpump could lead to overheating and underdriving the alternator could lead to charging problems, but they may be old wives tails. I really don't know, but I'd check with Gadget from URD about it if anyone knows I'd figure it's him.

Can't help you with the stock pullys though sorry, have you checked youru local bone yards?