Better Gas Mileage

Can the testers of the Ecco1 make a spread sheet of their current results? Maybe we can post it somewhere or post the results in this thread.

 

This is correct, and lower volatile fuels do not perform as well. The ECO-System enhances the fuel to help the injectors make a finer mist, creating a hotter burn. That is how we increase your performance and lower emissions resulting in a fuel savings.

To back up Mav's and 007's testing we have just been informed that NASA has just completed their testing of 2 months at NASA/WSTF (National Aeronautics and Space Administration / White Sands Test Facility) with permission granted thru GSA and found POSITIVE results from the use of ECO-Systems on their security forces vehicles that do high mileage. They are very excited about the increased mileage and increased performance as well.
Thanks,
Ben

 

If you'd like you can visit the website at www.ecosystemsupport.com and double click on Kleburg County to view the installations of some of their fleet vehicles. There are several users shown on the home page as well as recent news about ECO-Systems.
Ben

 

I'm driving a 08 4x4 tacoma DB LB and lifted it 3" and put 285/75R 16 cooper tires on it. I have 600 miles on the truck and am getting 14.5 miles per gallon right now. I drive mostly in town to and from work. Can I expect my mileage to improve? I'm hoping that the eco-system proves to be of help for the guys testing it.

 

Yes, in fact with your mods you will get an increase in performance, and if you drive the same an average of 10 to 12 percent in fuel economy. Here in Texas it is an average of 28 to 32 cents per gallon in savings.
Ben

 

Adam and I will be putting together a final report at the completion of the testing phase. This will include a compilation of our numbers.

 

Yeah, but did the paint all peel off like my '94 did?

 

No. It was the light blue with the silver on the bottom (last 10 inches). I never had a problem with the paint. As a matter of fact, it was never in a garage so it got pelted by rain and snow and Colorado winter slush and sleet and hail and New Mexico sun and ... well, everything.

All I did to it was keep it washed and "waxed" (automatic car washes only).

I miss no vehicle the way I miss that truck.

 

By the way, if you guys really want to save gas...install an in-cockpit manual mixture control (like they have in small aircraft). The only caveat is that you'll need to install EGT sensors on each exhaust to monitor where the hottest cylinder is. This setup allows the user to manually adjust fuel weight to air density (ratio).

One lean run that exceeds cylinder head temp tolerances, and you'll fry your motor. Also, aluminum doesn't like quick heat increases and decreases in temp or you'll get warped heads...etc.

Something like I'm suggesting might work well for long highway drives on cruise control.

I might just be wasting my breath too......the engine computer may already be doing this automatically since it's a fuel injected unit.

PS. I'm still getting 28 mpg @ 70-75 mph with my I4. Neener, neener Only 1,200 miles too.....which means it still might increase.

 

I think I will stick to the lower risk modifications...

That's a fair assumption.

Yes - I hate you.

I wish I could get that, but the PreRunner 4.10 rear gear ratio is really killing me. However, it is a huge help when getting on the highway (getting to 75 MPH by the end of the ramp isn't hard at all).

 

sorry about getting off topic 007 lol, i still need to figure out where everything goes haha...i topped off my tank with 93 octane the other day and have been driving just around the city with as slow as i can let myself drive, i'm about at the halfway point but i only have 150 miles so far! after it hits the 1/4 tank mark the needle just drops but i'm hoping to get to 300 miles on this tank, which will give me about 15mpg which isnt all that great for me trying to be easier on the gas and all

 

You're ride height contibutes to it as well. I read that approx 70-80% of the total drag created by a moving vehicle comes from the air that passes beneath the vehicle.

There are basically (3) types of drag:

Parasite: Created by non-lift producing surfaces (stuff that sticks out), like mirrors..etc.

Profile (form drag+skin friction): Shape/smoothness of object passing through the air.

Induced: Created through the production of lift.

The first (2) apply to us. The bad part is that the coeffient of drag is squared by the speed of the vehicle. In layman's terms....the faster you go the Much, much, more power and gas it takes.

Also, the harder you accelerate, the more inertia has to be overcome, which uses more fuel. This is extremely wasteful.

On a side note: remember, I had a '95 Z28 with a 350 5.7 liter LT-1 engine. It sat low to the ground and it was shaped like an F-16. I got 26 mpg on more than one occasion and it was an automatic tranny. Manual tranny's got close to 28. This was @ 65-70 mph on cruise.

 

That's probably mostly due to tires and not being broken in. Those tires will throw your speedometer off by 7%. I'm reading 15-16 mpg with my 285's via the stock odometer. With a scangauge calibrated for the larger tires it comes out 17-18 mpg. I got 14 a couple times from wheeling or really hammering on it. Also, you only have 600 miles on it! It's not even CLOSE to being fully broken in. I have 40k on mine and it didn't start to really loosen up, smooth out, and run better until at least 5k. And it's still getting better. Maybe not MPG wise, but smoother shifting, less down shifting on hills, etc.

 

Yay, I finally got my ScanGauge today! Between installation and calibration I estimate that it took all of 20 minutes, tops.

Now all I have to do is fine-tune the gas mileage percentage values.

Incidentally, I just refigured my 2nd tank of fuel manually and the combined highway and city driving came to 390 miles @ exactly 15 gallons. That's 26 mpg. Granted, 95% of that tank was highway miles.

On initial tests @ 55 mph I am reading 33.4 mpg on the SGII. Who the hell drives that slowly? I'll be glad when I can calibrate the thing completely on the next fillup.

So far I'm enjoying the SGII. I'm a bit surprised at the Water Temp value though.....195 degrees. This was in-town, however.

I don't get Manifold Pressure readings or Fuel Pressure readings but I read this is normal. Maybe xguage codes will come out for them later.

By the way, I spent an hour talking to my friend inside the Toyota dealership (parts manager) and he said that these trucks don't even start to break-in until about 20-25,000 miles.

 

No worries about getting off topic. We all do that (ndcouch and I are experts ). I am just trying to keep this thread on subject since it is being watched so much.

As far as the fuel economy goes (being that you have a PreRunner Access Cab, and you are only getting 15 MPG), I would be concerned.

 

That's why I miss my Suburban...

Yeah, I understand about the ride height. I think we discussed that in an earlier thread. It just ticks me off that the EPA Estimated Fuel Economy doesn't change between the PreRunner and the Regular Access Cab. Unfortunately, the ride height is a must for me. It has come in handy more times than I would like in the past 26,000 miles.

 

The best mileage I saw was around 15K-20K miles.

 

NASA is using your system or am I reading that wrong?

Adam and 007 can you PM or email all your data? I will make a table and post it so we can all go through the numbers.

Sorry Taz I am still interested but I still do not understand how copper give better gas millage and more "throttle response". Then again I am not a chemical engineer.

Also I am in CA which means less humidity than TX and East coasters. Not that would make much of a factor but it still is a variable on moisture in the air the truck is breathing.

 

All the data that I have so far is in this thread. I will be compilining my logs at the end of the test.

I will be re-installing the VPE on Friday. I plan on going through 3 tanks in the next two weeks. Once Adam feels that he has successfully tested the VPE, we will compile a final report.

 

NASA did testing at their White Sands Testing Facility with permission from GSA to see if they could get a fuel savings by using ECO-Systems on their vehicles. All Federal government agencies have been mandated to reduce fuel consumption. Nasa did the testing on their security forces vehicles since they do the most mileage and they had positive results. (over 10 percent in savings) They are now in the process of ordering more of the units.

We do have a money back guarantee so you need not worry.

The drier the air the better the air fuel mixture as well. Our customers in the desert southwest get better results than in the humid southeast areas.
Thanks
Ben