Gas Mileage
Question:
The 26 MPG ideal from the EPA was for a 4000 lb 350 ci vehicle not for a small car like the Camry. BTW, check your speedo accuracy. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > x-no-archive: yes >You need to remember that the 26mpg is in ideal conditions. > Nope, > I’ve a 91 Camry with 240,000+ miles that gets 31 mpg on the highway. > There is nothing at all ideal about the car, except of course for the > design. Avg speed for the test is 75 mph. > — > Exchange the "pip" and the"shore" to reply by email > Vs lbh pna ernq guvf lbh ernyyl bhtug gb trg bhg zber
Response:
> > You need to remember that the 26mpg is in ideal conditions….meaning 55 > mph, properly inflated tires, high octane gas (92), no hills or mountains, > perfectly smooth surface and other nearly impossible driving conditions to > recreate. > The EPA runs thier tests with the octane specified by the manufacturer. I am > sure they used 87 octane for a Caprice. > Ed
14 Sep 99 Try an additive tested by GM. See http://www.netside.com/~parsec/parsec.htm. Engr/Tech Support comcentr/hp {}{}{} Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com {}{}{}
Response:
I visited your web site and the claims are impressive. However if Ford and GM tests really showed such great increase in gas mileage using your product, why aren’t they shipping this product in their engines? All US automobile manufacturers are spending millions and millions to increase gas mileage by a few tenths of a mile per gallon. If what your web site claims is even partially correct, they could radically increase the fleet mpg just by specifying your product. There is definitely something fishy here. Ed – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Try an additive tested by GM. See http://www.netside.com/~parsec/parsec.htm. > Engr/Tech Support > comcentr/hp
Response:
Ed, your logic is irrefutable. Stan K. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I visited your web site and the claims are impressive. However if Ford and GM > tests really showed such great increase in gas mileage using your product, why > aren’t they shipping this product in their engines? All US automobile > manufacturers are spending millions and millions to increase gas mileage by a few > tenths of a mile per gallon. If what your web site claims is even partially > correct, they could radically increase the fleet mpg just by specifying your > product. There is definitely something fishy here. > Ed > Try an additive tested by GM. See http://www.netside.com/~parsec/parsec.htm. > Engr/Tech Support > comcentr/hp
Response:
Good answer, Ed! There is this persistant myth that all Detroit engine engineers are a bunch of hopeless idiots. There is certainly enough money in the auto industry to hire competent engineers. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I visited your web site and the claims are impressive. However if Ford and GM > tests really showed such great increase in gas mileage using your product, why > aren’t they shipping this product in their engines? All US automobile > manufacturers are spending millions and millions to increase gas mileage by a few > tenths of a mile per gallon. If what your web site claims is even partially > correct, they could radically increase the fleet mpg just by specifying your > product. There is definitely something fishy here. > Ed > Try an additive tested by GM. See http://www.netside.com/~parsec/parsec.htm. > Engr/Tech Support > comcentr/hp
– Don Stauffer in Minneapolis http://home1.gte.net/stauffer/
Response:
Gee, I got 400 miles on half a tank on my ‘66 Mustang once, then when the car stopped, the gas gauge decided to indicate Empty instead of Half! Alan B
Response:
However, they do cut the values for the highway test by 22 percent now – don’t know if they used to – to make the results closer to real-world findings. — Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada Home Page: http://members.home.net/hancockr – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If I drove 48mph on any freeway, I’d be getting tickets like crazy. > Leave it to the government to blow it badly. Lets make the regulators > and EPA run thier cars at those speeds and see how long it will take > to get some reality. > — > Bob May > Well the 48mph was an average, not the max. Since the test was originally > conceived when the national speed limit was 55, the 48 mph average is > reasonable. Unless you making a long trip on an interstate, averaging > 48mph is not easy. I make a regular 140 mile trip over a variety of roads > (some interstate quality, some two lane, with speed limits from 35 to 70). > I really have to press (and drive 5 mph or so over the posted limits) to > average 54 mph for the 140 miles. If I actually stuck to the posted limits > 48mph would be about right. Of course if you get on the interstate and > drive 80, I am sure you can do much better than a 48mph average, but I am > not sure such a test would be very meaningful to the average consumer. As > it is, the MPG figures from the EPA Highway cycle are extremely > optimistic. > Ed
Response:
Have never had a vehicle that would not exceed the EPA mpg figure… (except a 98 Cavalier with the DOHC 4, but man, that one ran).. Right now, I own a 99 Malibu with the 3.1 V-6 auto, cruise, air.. 2600 mile trip to Fla and back to IL. averaged 32 mpg. Best milage was 34.6 (running at 60) worst was about 26 (running at around 85-90). running around 2k RPM (69 mph +-) seems to be a pretty good cruising speed, 32 – 33 mpg. and that is checked with a true fill up. (gas is visible above the nozzle restriction plate) Just wish the Malibu had a bigger tank….
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Considering you had to start and stop, and undoubtedly made other stops, to > maintain a 70 mph average your speed was undoubtedly much higher most of the > time. Once aerodynamic forces begin to dominate over tire and mechanical > friction, power required goes as the cube of the speed, so that high speed > would really cause the milage to plummet. > Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas > on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the > result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage > should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas > is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 > miles/hour. > The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. > New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. > Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter > on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck > on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. > Anybody please give your opinon and explaination. > — > Don Stauffer in Minneapolis > http://home1.gte.net/stauffer/
Response:
If I drove 48mph on any freeway, I’d be getting tickets like crazy. Leave it to the government to blow it badly. Lets make the regulators and EPA run thier cars at those speeds and see how long it will take to get some reality. — Bob May I don’t read attachments to posts as they may give me a virus If I expect an attachment from you I will open it.. You may have a brilliant thought but if you put it into an attachment I won’t read it and thus both you and I lose. I don’t like to say it but unfortunatly, there are those who insist upon being nasty to the rest of us. Bob May
Response:
> If I drove 48mph on any freeway, I’d be getting tickets like crazy. > Leave it to the government to blow it badly. Lets make the regulators > and EPA run thier cars at those speeds and see how long it will take > to get some reality. > — > Bob May
Well the 48mph was an average, not the max. Since the test was originally conceived when the national speed limit was 55, the 48 mph average is reasonable. Unless you making a long trip on an interstate, averaging 48mph is not easy. I make a regular 140 mile trip over a variety of roads (some interstate quality, some two lane, with speed limits from 35 to 70). I really have to press (and drive 5 mph or so over the posted limits) to average 54 mph for the 140 miles. If I actually stuck to the posted limits 48mph would be about right. Of course if you get on the interstate and drive 80, I am sure you can do much better than a 48mph average, but I am not sure such a test would be very meaningful to the average consumer. As it is, the MPG figures from the EPA Highway cycle are extremely optimistic. Ed
Response:
> You need to remember that the 26mpg is in ideal conditions….meaning 55 > mph, properly inflated tires, high octane gas (92), no hills or mountains, > perfectly smooth surface and other nearly impossible driving conditions to > recreate.
The EPA runs thier tests with the octane specified by the manufacturer. I am sure they used 87 octane for a Caprice. Ed
Response:
> EPA hi-way mileage is based on speed from 45 – 85 mph. The driver is very > experienced. This message is posted on EPA web page.
I believe you have this wrong. See: http://www.epa.gov/orcdizux/cert/feguide/99guide4.htm#fuelest They only average 48 mph in the EPA Highway test. Ed
Response:
For more info on the EPA Test see: http://www.epa.gov/orcdizux/cert/feguide/99guide4.htm#fuelest They only average 48 mph in the EPA Highway test. Ed
Response:
Considering you had to start and stop, and undoubtedly made other stops, to maintain a 70 mph average your speed was undoubtedly much higher most of the time. Once aerodynamic forces begin to dominate over tire and mechanical friction, power required goes as the cube of the speed, so that high speed would really cause the milage to plummet. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas > on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the > result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage > should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas > is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 > miles/hour. > The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. > New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. > Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter > on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck > on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. > Anybody please give your opinon and explaination.
– Don Stauffer in Minneapolis http://home1.gte.net/stauffer/
Response:
Making a gas mileage measurement based on one tank of gas is risky. I keep a gas mileage log on all my vehicles and it is amazing how much the mileage can vary from one tankful to the next. My F150 is the worst vehicle I have ever had for this. It has a flat thin 18 gallon tank. Small changes in the angle of the parking lot at the pump make a big difference in how much gas you can put in it. I used to drive the truck on a 300 mile round trip once a week. The trip was always the same and I usually filled up at the same stations. The gas mileage for any one tank calculated to be from 12 to 27 mpg. This was for the same truck, same time of year, same road, same gas. The actual gas mileage was probably very consistent. It was just the tank filling properties that messed up the calculations. If you calculated the averaged over 3 or more tankfuls, things settled down to be very consistent. Anytime I hear gas mileage figures, I am always suspicious. You need to track it for more than just a single tankful to get meaningful results. Having said all this, 19mpg is not all that bad for a Caprice running at 70mph. I would have thought you should have gotten 22 or so, but it would not take much of a fill-up difference to drop it to 19mpg. It is around 230 miles from Washington to NYC. At 19mpg this means you used 12.1 gallons of gas. At 22mpg you would have used 10.5 gallons of gas. I think it would be very easy to have that much difference it tank fills. The EPA highway mileage numbers are usually very very optimistic. I do not think they properly allow for aerodynamic drag. They are also based on a cycle with a maximum speed of 55 mph. Ed – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas > on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the > result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage > should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas > is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 > miles/hour. > The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. > New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. > Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter > on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck > on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. > Anybody please give your opinon and explaination.
Response:
Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 miles/hour. The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. Anybody please give your opinon and explaination.
Response:
You need to remember that the 26mpg is in ideal conditions….meaning 55 mph, properly inflated tires, high octane gas (92), no hills or mountains, perfectly smooth surface and other nearly impossible driving conditions to recreate. What I would do is check the tire pressure, put some Red-line fuel cleaner in, and clean the throttle body or carb. If your transmission was going out you would notice the first to second gear shift slipping. Also, you do have overdrive and should be able to tell by the engine noise if it isn’t going into overdrive.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas > on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the > result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage > should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas > is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 > miles/hour. > The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. > New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. > Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter > on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck > on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. > Anybody please give your opinon and explaination.
Response:
Just for reference, I think that the EPA milage is done at 55mph and a steady throttle. If you don’t run at a steady throttle then you will lose milage and with the air running on a hot day (another loser for mpg) the mpg will drop even more. It also helps to have the tires fully pressurized. — Bob May I don’t read attachments to posts as they may give me a virus If I expect an attachment from you I will open it.. You may have a brilliant thought but if you put it into an attachment I won’t read it and thus both you and I lose. I don’t like to say it but unfortunatly, there are those who insist upon being nasty to the rest of us. Bob May
Response:
wow…18mpg is pretty bad for highway. wow don’t u just count the shifts if u got no tach? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas >on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the >result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage >should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas >is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 >miles/hour. >The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. >New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. >Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter >on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck >on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. >Anybody please give your opinon and explaination.
Response:
EPA hi-way mileage is based on speed from 45 – 85 mph. The driver is very experienced. This message is posted on EPA web page. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > You need to remember that the 26mpg is in ideal conditions….meaning 55 > mph, properly inflated tires, high octane gas (92), no hills or mountains, > perfectly smooth surface and other nearly impossible driving conditions to > recreate. > What I would do is check the tire pressure, put some Red-line fuel cleaner > in, and clean the throttle body or carb. If your transmission was going out > you would notice the first to second gear shift slipping. Also, you do have > overdrive and should be able to tell by the engine noise if it isn’t going > into overdrive.
Response:
New York to Washington round trip is around 450 miles, barely a tank an a half. If you didn’t precisely top up the tank the same way when you started and finished, its doubtful your calculations are very accurate. Just 2 gallons off in the 25 gallons you probably used is worth 1.5 mpg. I would expect that your Caprice should get close to what my ‘92 Mercury Grand Marquis gets under similar driving conditions around 22 mpg at 70 mph with the AC on. with a neutral wind direction. If your trip encountered heavy head winds in both directions due to weather, that could account for another 1-2 mpg. Driving style has a lot to do with it as well. If you’re doing most of the driving with the cruise on then that’s near optimum. On the other hand, if you like to run right up to the guy in front and lay on the brakes a lot, that could cost you quite a bit as well. An onboard trip computer with a mpg readout can help a driver to learn the advantages of being a smooth driver. When I calculate mpg based on a single tank, I fillup and refill at the same exact pump with the car pointing in the same direction so I can top off the tank as similarly as possible. Best way is to simply do it for many fillups and take the average. For instance, the actual average mileage for my ‘86 Mark VII is exactly 20.21 mpg for the most recent 80,000 miles. That includes all the 87 octane fuel I pumped through it towing trailers, idling in traffic jams, doing repairs in the driveway, going cross country on the interstate, etc. Most (95%) was with the AC on. Stan K. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > You need to remember that the 26mpg is in ideal conditions….meaning 55 > mph, properly inflated tires, high octane gas (92), no hills or mountains, > perfectly smooth surface and other nearly impossible driving conditions to > recreate. > What I would do is check the tire pressure, put some Red-line fuel cleaner > in, and clean the throttle body or carb. If your transmission was going out > you would notice the first to second gear shift slipping. Also, you do have > overdrive and should be able to tell by the engine noise if it isn’t going > into overdrive. > Yesterday I drove my 96 Caprice 9C1 to Washington from NY, I filled up gas > on I-95. After came back this afternoon, I calculated gas mileage, the > result is on 18 miles/gallon. Based on EPA data, the hi-way gas mileage > should be around 26 miles/gallon. The entire trip was hi-way only! the gas > is Mobil #87. The A/C was on the trip, the average speed was 70 > miles/hour. > The car has 88,000 miles on the clock, the engine was rebult in June ‘99. > New factory plugs, new oil pump, new fuel filter and air filter. > Does this mean my transmission having problem since there is no taco-meter > on 9C1? I am afraid that the tranny has no over-drive and its gear stuck > on its low gear, causing engine in high RPM. > Anybody please give your opinon and explaination.
Response:
I averaged 20.8 mpg between Tucson and San Diego this weekend at about 75 mph with the Air Conditioning system running the entire trip. I would say that is pretty close to EPA estimates.
Response:
BTW I have a 99 EB with the 4.0L V6 and 8,0000 miles on it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I averaged 20.8 mpg between Tucson and San Diego this weekend at about > 75 mph with the Air Conditioning system running the entire trip. I > would say that is pretty close to EPA estimates.
Response:
We live in New England. On one all-interstate trip to Indianapolis, we managed 19.5 (70mph avg). But at home, in combined highway/in-town driving, just 16.0. We have a ‘98 EB 4 door 5.0 V8.
Response:
I’m averaging 17.3 combined highway/town. 99 Limited 5.0 V8 — {Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking.} http://www.pagoo.com/me.asp?9039623700
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> We live in New England. On one all-interstate trip to Indianapolis, we managed > 19.5 (70mph avg). But at home, in combined highway/in-town driving, just > 16.0. > We have a ‘98 EB 4 door 5.0 V8.
Response:
In what?
Response:
IF you had bothered to read my second posting, you would have seen that I inadvertently omitted the information on type of vehicle from the first posting. So, I corrected my error. It is a 99 EB 4.0 V6. I guess that thoroughness is not one of your strong suits – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > In what?
Response:
So what was your mileage?
Response:
>I have a 92 Explorer EB with the 4.0L V6, I havn’t had it long enough to >calculate the best gas milage with it.. Anyone else help me out on what I >SHOULD be getting with it? Just so I can compare with my results.. The tank >holds 73 L of fuel.. what is the max I should be gettting around in KM on a >tank???
Bob: I look for gas stations when the meter gets to about 300 miles. At 340, I’m looking pretty hard. I have the same ‘92 that you do. I also run the CARB oxygenated fuel, with beats me up by 10-15% on mileage. Current average is 18.1mpg. That’s no A/C, and about 50% highway. Enjoy your ‘new’ car! dr bob
Response:
I have a 92 Explorer EB with the 4.0L V6, I havn’t had it long enough to calculate the best gas milage with it.. Anyone else help me out on what I SHOULD be getting with it? Just so I can compare with my results.. The tank holds 73 L of fuel.. what is the max I should be gettting around in KM on a tank??? Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> A quick note for all you people who complain bitterly about the > gas-mileage of the Explorer; we’re the lucky ones! > In truck circles the gas-mileage of the Explorer is pretty good IMO… > try getting the same gas-mileage figures out of, say, a v8 Dodge RAM! > IME the RAM gets lower gas-mileage. Granted it’s a bigger truck… but > it doesn’t really weigh THAT much more than a loaded Explorer. > Secondly… my Explorer v8 replaced a 1972 Dodge Coronet which gave me > an average 8mpg if I was lucky… the 17-18mpg I get out of the > Explorer seems like a godsend compared to that 
> For reference… another car I’ve owned at one point or another was a > 1993 Pontiac Grand Am v6, which got about 24mpg. Seems pretty good now, > huh? ) > Gavin Haslett > ‘97 V8 AWD Explorer
Response:
A quick note for all you people who complain bitterly about the gas-mileage of the Explorer; we’re the lucky ones! In truck circles the gas-mileage of the Explorer is pretty good IMO… try getting the same gas-mileage figures out of, say, a v8 Dodge RAM! IME the RAM gets lower gas-mileage. Granted it’s a bigger truck… but it doesn’t really weigh THAT much more than a loaded Explorer. Secondly… my Explorer v8 replaced a 1972 Dodge Coronet which gave me an average 8mpg if I was lucky… the 17-18mpg I get out of the Explorer seems like a godsend compared to that For reference… another car I’ve owned at one point or another was a 1993 Pontiac Grand Am v6, which got about 24mpg. Seems pretty good now, huh? ) Gavin Haslett ‘97 V8 AWD Explorer
Response:
GIVE ME A BREAK!!! PUT YOUR INFOMERCIAL SOMEPLACE ELSE. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >I had a client who experienced the same problem. he just recently >installed a Fuelmax on his Explorer and noticed more power and increase >in mileage >Hey Tony… >Thanks for the follow up. I just received the Fuel Max a few days ago. I >also noticed that GM has the patents on it and was made in the USA. Let >me tell you, I have a V8 5.0 engine with about 45,000 miles on it in my >Explorer, and I notice a really nice increase in power and the truck >runs so much smoother. It seems like it’s working a lot less harder to >accomplish the same tasks like cruising at seventy on the highway. >Really >nice, and let me say, when I hit the gas hard, especially on the >highway, the engine really cranks a lot more and seems to be picking up >speed a lot quicker then it used to. It’s so evident, the difference is >fantastic. I was gonna trade my truck in for a V6 version because of the >gas mileage, but I think I will hold off until I see what this fuel >mileage does. It will be nice to see an increase in the fuel mileage so >I can keep the power of the V8. It comes in real handy. Thanks for that >picture you sent me. It did help me out. I had my fuel max installed in >about 5 minutes. Pretty simple actually. I put if very very close to the >fuel injection system. I was really excited to see it work so well so >quickly. The truck over all runs a lot smoother, is considerably more >responsive, has a lot more power on both the highway and regular roads >and seems to be making my truck produce a lot less fumes when I first >start it up. I don’t smell the not fully burned fuel in the morning >anymore. Great product. Now the only thing to find out is about the fuel >mileage. So far, I filled up my tank yesterday and drove about 16 miles >already. Usually after driving that distance, I see my fuel gauge start >to dip below the full mark. But, it is still up there. Still passed the >full mark I hope it’s not my imagination. I want to see what happens >with that. So far I am very pleased. My brother has a 70 something Nova >with a 305 in it. He is going to try his fuel max on that and see what >happens.Thanks again for the pic and concern. Keep in touch and I will >let you know the full scoop. I wish everyone would get one of these, >just imagine how much cleaner the air would be. That is also one of the >main reasons I bought the fuel max, for the environment. But those damn >oil companies don’t give a #$ about the environment. Hey, sooner or >later they will pay for the damage they do to the planet. But in any >case, i will talk to you later and give you another update in a week or >so. > Hi Chris, > Just wanted to know if you received your Fuelmax yet? > If so, did you manage to install it on your Ford Explorer ? > If you have any questions you can always reach me by email. > Thank you, > Tony
– Ben Kaufman Do not send SPAM. I will send it back to your de-hacked ISP with a letter of complaint. Section 301 does not apply because you have been forewarned! For all others, change the domain name to pobox
Response:
> "Q.8- Why can’t the oil companies provide this boost? > A.8- Because the fracturing of hydrocarbon >chains occurs only when the fuel is passed through the FUELMAX booster >.When the engine is turned off ,the fracturing of hydrocarbon chains >stops. The phenomena of fracturing the hydrocarbon chains only can be >induced by the FUELMAX. "
Magnets can also fracture the time-space continueum. Just put a few in your front bumper and you’ll never be late again. Government scientists have known this fact since 1952 when an alien UFO crash landed in the desert and all of these magnets fell out of its bumper but they are under a government secrecy clause and will be terminated if they talk about it. To the skeptical, try this little experiment. Put two magnets in close proximity to eachother. If they attract it is fracturing time in the future. If they repel it is fracturing time in the past. The only reason why you can’t go back or forward in time is because the gap between the magnets is not wide enough to drive your car through. Everyone I know who puts magnets in their bumpers feels a tremendous improvement in punctuality. The auto manufacturers were even thinking of putting the magnets in the bumpers but they didn’t want to raise Hooverian suspicion that they had access to the top secret UFO data. Ben — Ben Kaufman Do not send SPAM. I will send it back to your de-hacked ISP with a letter of complaint. Section 301 does not apply because you have been forewarned! For all others, change the domain name to pobox
Response:
If you use a red and a blue magnet you can travel thru time. A pastel blue is faster than royal or navy I’ve found.
Response:
I read his site, and I must say, anyone with an understanding of mechanics will find the FAQ page quite entertaining. I particularly likedthis one: "Q.8- Why can’t the oil companies provide this boost? A.8- Because the fracturing of hydrocarbon chains occurs only when the fuel is passed through the FUELMAX booster .When the engine is turned off ,the fracturing of hydrocarbon chains stops. The phenomena of fracturing the hydrocarbon chains only can be induced by the FUELMAX. " So magnets can now crack gas??!! And this one is really great: " Q26-Why aren’t the car manufacturers using the FUELMAX in their vehicles? A26-Car manufactures are running tests on the FUELMAX, but since they are in the business of selling cars, they really focus more on design and safety features, rather then improving fuel mileage. As we all know car manufactures already have engines that can achieve 100 miles per gallon. Why haven’t they introduced those engines to the market place? The Large Oil Companies are powerful !" yeah, I want one o’them 100 MPG engines!! My uncle had one ‘way back when. Then, when he took it in for service, they took that engine out, and replaced it with a normal one. While he waited. In a half hour. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >As a fuel economy engineer for one of the Big Two, I can conclusively >say that this is a ripoff with NO measurable improvement or scientific >validity. >My company spent $750 million last year to get less than a 1 mpg >improvement in CAFE. If this worked, we’d be all over it! >I’ve reported you to the postal service and the Micigan Attorney’s >general. Have a good life. >I had a client who experienced the same problem. he just recently >installed a Fuelmax on his Explorer and noticed more power and increase >in mileage >Hey Tony… >Thanks for the follow up. I just received the Fuel Max a few days ago. I >also noticed that GM has the patents on it and was made in the USA. Let >me tell you, I have a V8 5.0 engine with about 45,000 miles on it in my >Explorer, and I notice a really nice increase in power and the truck >runs so much smoother. It seems like it’s working a lot less harder to >accomplish the same tasks like cruising at seventy on the highway. >Really >nice, and let me say, when I hit the gas hard, especially on the >highway, the engine really cranks a lot more and seems to be picking up >speed a lot quicker then it used to. It’s so evident, the difference is >fantastic. I was gonna trade my truck in for a V6 version because of the >(Bullshit Snipped >so. >> Hi Chris, >> Just wanted to know if you received your Fuelmax yet? >> If so, did you manage to install it on your Ford Explorer ? >> If you have any questions you can always reach me by email. >> Thank you, >> Tony
Response:
As a fuel economy engineer for one of the Big Two, I can conclusively say that this is a ripoff with NO measurable improvement or scientific validity. My company spent $750 million last year to get less than a 1 mpg improvement in CAFE. If this worked, we’d be all over it! I’ve reported you to the postal service and the Micigan Attorney’s general. Have a good life. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >I had a client who experienced the same problem. he just recently >installed a Fuelmax on his Explorer and noticed more power and increase >in mileage >Hey Tony… >Thanks for the follow up. I just received the Fuel Max a few days ago. I >also noticed that GM has the patents on it and was made in the USA. Let >me tell you, I have a V8 5.0 engine with about 45,000 miles on it in my >Explorer, and I notice a really nice increase in power and the truck >runs so much smoother. It seems like it’s working a lot less harder to >accomplish the same tasks like cruising at seventy on the highway. >Really >nice, and let me say, when I hit the gas hard, especially on the >highway, the engine really cranks a lot more and seems to be picking up >speed a lot quicker then it used to. It’s so evident, the difference is >fantastic. I was gonna trade my truck in for a V6 version because of the (Bullshit Snipped >so. > Hi Chris, > Just wanted to know if you received your Fuelmax yet? > If so, did you manage to install it on your Ford Explorer ? > If you have any questions you can always reach me by email. > Thank you, > Tony
Response:
I had a client who experienced the same problem. he just recently installed a Fuelmax on his Explorer and noticed more power and increase in mileage Hey Tony… Thanks for the follow up. I just received the Fuel Max a few days ago. I also noticed that GM has the patents on it and was made in the USA. Let me tell you, I have a V8 5.0 engine with about 45,000 miles on it in my Explorer, and I notice a really nice increase in power and the truck runs so much smoother. It seems like it’s working a lot less harder to accomplish the same tasks like cruising at seventy on the highway. Really nice, and let me say, when I hit the gas hard, especially on the highway, the engine really cranks a lot more and seems to be picking up speed a lot quicker then it used to. It’s so evident, the difference is fantastic. I was gonna trade my truck in for a V6 version because of the gas mileage, but I think I will hold off until I see what this fuel mileage does. It will be nice to see an increase in the fuel mileage so I can keep the power of the V8. It comes in real handy. Thanks for that picture you sent me. It did help me out. I had my fuel max installed in about 5 minutes. Pretty simple actually. I put if very very close to the fuel injection system. I was really excited to see it work so well so quickly. The truck over all runs a lot smoother, is considerably more responsive, has a lot more power on both the highway and regular roads and seems to be making my truck produce a lot less fumes when I first start it up. I don’t smell the not fully burned fuel in the morning anymore. Great product. Now the only thing to find out is about the fuel mileage. So far, I filled up my tank yesterday and drove about 16 miles already. Usually after driving that distance, I see my fuel gauge start to dip below the full mark. But, it is still up there. Still passed the full mark I hope it’s not my imagination. I want to see what happens with that. So far I am very pleased. My brother has a 70 something Nova with a 305 in it. He is going to try his fuel max on that and see what happens.Thanks again for the pic and concern. Keep in touch and I will let you know the full scoop. I wish everyone would get one of these, just imagine how much cleaner the air would be. That is also one of the main reasons I bought the fuel max, for the environment. But those damn oil companies don’t give a #$ about the environment. Hey, sooner or later they will pay for the damage they do to the planet. But in any case, i will talk to you later and give you another update in a week or so. > Hi Chris, > Just wanted to know if you received your Fuelmax yet? > If so, did you manage to install it on your Ford Explorer ? > If you have any questions you can always reach me by email. > Thank you, > Tony
– http://www.dsuper.net/~tonyg29/ Increase your Mileage by 20% With the FuelMax Booster
