Surprising increase in truck MPG

Talking of econmy runs, It as just before D day here in the UK in 1944 when your grandfathers and fathers were under canvas all along the S coast. there were some woods opposite where they were camped and a couple of houses down they had their mess and some billetts. they were very kind to me, a 10 yr old at that time, giving me a Nux? bar, American comics such as Superman with Mr. Mxtlplk from cornucopia!! I even had a breakfast of creamed corn, hash browns bacon and eggs!! But what stuck in mt mind was popular mechanics magazine. In that there was an article on how to prepare for an economy run. Every car had just 1 gallon of petrol. Tyres machined so that there was only 2in of tread. thin oil in engine gearbox and axle. Radiator blanked off virtually no breaking, gentle acceleration . and lots of coasting. Some time ago i might add Cant remember much else!!. Such as mpg achieved. It was somewhere in the 60's to 70's mpg. I may be wrong. My parents asked one GI to come in and eat with us. Named Don. We kept in touch after the war when he got back to the USA. Remember it all very well. Does any of this ring a bell? Any one have popular mechanics from that time?

Ted Frater Dorset UK

He wrote others too: "Small Town DA", "Danny and the Boys", etc Anatomy of a Murder was set around Marquette, and I think Traver lived, worked and fished in that part of the state as an adult.

Hemmingway wrote of trout fishing in The Big Twohearted River which is near Newberry.

Here are the covers from Popular Mechanics in 1944. Maybe you'll recognize it. May's cover story was "How much oil is left?" They were a little premature. :

-- Ed Huntress

OOOoooo.....

That one goes on the Proof page! :)

Richard

>

I haven't read it, but a comment I saw said that PM claimed we'd be out of oil by 1955. Too bad the Club of Rome didn't read it; it would have saved them a lot of embarrassment 25 years later. d8-)

-- Ed Huntress

My first exposure to the "out of oil" situation was about 15 years ago. I checked out a book from the Air Force Library - yet another aircraft design book.

In one chapter they were discussing the cost of building and operating future aircraft. It had a graph of domestic and world oil supply. Domestic supply ran out about 2010, world supply about 2025.

Also depicted the Hubbert peak curves - which I later learned more about.

Scary stuff back then.

And now, it seems to be coming true...

Richard

Jim, Why is it that YOU are the ONLY one I have ever heard claim that you get better mileage with 10% alcohol. The companies that produce it and push it will tell you straight out that you will LOSE mileage using alcohol, WHY? Because it delivers LESS energy per gallon than straight gasoline (even 85 octane has a higher energy content).

From

"The most obvious benefit of ethanol-blend fuels is that it decreases our dependence on foreign oil...If we could run our vehicles/engines on

100% ethanol, which has been successful in Brazil - this benefit would be noticeable - Unfortunately since E10 (10% alcohol) results in a 5-7% drop in mpg, our decrease in foreign oil use is minimal.

On so many levels the good intentions of our government over the past 10 years in promoting ethanol, ignored the negative side effects increased ethanol production would cause. For example, several recent studies reveal that the ethanol plants have reached medically unacceptable levels of pollution (increased lung disease) in the vicinity near these plants. This is one serious obstacle we must overcome before we could encourage increased production/distribution of ethanol."

anything MISSING? Namely a claim to BETTER MILEAGE with Ethanol? You would think that the organization pushing ethanol usage would have that as a prominent item on that page. IF IT WAS TRUE.

What is E10? E10 is a gasoline/ethanol blend (90 percent unleaded gasoline and 10 percent ethanol or ethyl alcohol).

What are the benefits of E10? E10 lowers carbon monoxide and other tailpipe emissions because it burns cleaner than 100 percent gasoline, maintaining air quality and complying with EPA mandates. E10 helps offset greenhouse gas emissions caused by burning fossil fuels, it biodegradable and does not contaminate ground water supplies.

Hmm, another site pushing ethanol. And again the MISSING mileage increase statement.

(a LARGE ethanol producer. Surely they would have the "fact" you claim)

Renewable: Because ethanol is produced from corn, each new year means a new corn crop and more ethanol. Burns cleaner than gasoline: Reduces harmful tailpipe emissions. Domestically Produced: Enhances the nation's energy security.

Nope Missing there as well....

I Know I'll look at the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition, They must have tested E10 and E 85. They will have the facts about mileage increases.

What is the range of a flexible fuel vehicle? Response:

Ethanol has less energy content than gasoline. However, E85 also has a much higher octane (ranging from 96 to 105) than gasoline. FFVs are not optimized to E85, so they experience a 10-15% drop in fuel economy. This will vary based on the way one drives, the air pressure in the tires, and additional driving conditions.

OOPS, 10-15% DROP in Mileage...

How about looking at a paper from a state that mandates E10 for vehicles. They will have the straight facts

"According to a recent article, drivers in Honolulu (and perhaps elsewhere) are complaining of reduced gas mileage in the two months since Hawaii switched to gasoline blended with 10% ethanol.

According to the Ethanol Promotion and Information council, most drivers using a 10% ethanol-blended gas will experience a 1-2% drop in mileage.

But some drivers in Hawaii are claiming that their mileage has dropped by 25-30%. While I?ve heard of substantially lower mileage in cars running on E85 (a blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline that can be used in certain makes/models) I never really heard anything about reduced mileage in the more ?standard? 90/10 ethanol blend."

Darn, there is that pesky DROP in mileage again.

Snipped a bunch of BS here.

Snip more BS

Snip of MORE BS

So jim, Should I post a few more ACTUAL TESTS and information links from a few HUNDREDS more Ethanol manufacturers and green fuel sites. OR would you care to admit that YOU are the one doing the "wishful thinking"

Since I don't think anyone has mentioned it, while going around the various esoteric possibilities - perhaps a sticky brake or e-brake has unstuck?

The comments about not-very-good methodology for measuring consumption are true.

Another reason for not running the tank all the way down is the good old condensate in the fuel tank issue - far better to fill the top half of the tank than to let it run all the way down in around-town short-haul driving simply for that reason, with or without the fuel pump happiness as another reason (and the water resulting may be part of fuel-pump unhappiness).

I've gotten mileage that bad, but with a one-ton crew cab 4wd - and it would do better than that on the highway.

"Miles-per-tankful" is practically meaningless... especially if you judge your gas stops according to GM's randomly wandering fuel gauges. Your tank should hold 26 gallons plus about a gallon in the filler neck. Everything I have ever seen published said "26 gallon tank":

If you occasionally run it down further and put 26.5 gallons in when you are used to only putting 21.5 gallons in... you would go about 23% further. It sounds like the high gas prices have you waiting longer to fill up... hoping for a miracle? >;-} I have been running mostly E85 (85% ethanol) in my Silverado for about a year, and my mileage is down 16% (2.6 mpg) in a "semi-controlled" test (same gas pump, same stretch of highway, same weather, cruise control on 75 mph for 70 miles)... repeated a couple times on gas and on E85. The engine makes more power and requires less throttle to go the same speed; so the mileage suffers less than you would expect if you listened to people who haven't tried it. LOL

"Ignoramus15242" wrote in message news:CJydne3zE43oIZXVnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com...

I don't either, but my 4 banger gets 19-20 at 60-65 pulling a 1600lb pop-up trailer. "Aerodynamics of a brick" indeed.

-Brian

You have a "flex fuel" engine - which is tuned to be able to take advantage of the extra octane in E85 so you will not notice as severe a degradation in economy, and you will experience somewhat enhanced performance on E85.

A NON FLEXFUEL engine cannot take advantage of the higher octane, and cannot compensate for the high ethanol content, and therefore does not run very well at all on E85, and suffers dramatically in both power and economy.

** Posted from **

Until I try to accelerate.....

Going back some 60+ years, a great uncle used to fill up the Model "A" (the car I took my test on) every time he went to town because he liked to use it off the top, OTOH the neighbour's mother would only give him 25 cents for gas for the '29 Durant, so that he wouldn't get very far if he got lost or decided to run away on her.

Gerry :-)} London, Canada

| Mobil itself claims only a 2% improvement in fuel economy Plain synthetic* is 50% more slippery than plain mineral oil, but a difference in torque ( fr using different oils ) is noticeable only @ high rpm, so the more usage @ high rpm produces the more rise in mpg : 2% is too low ( likely incl usage @ low rpm ), 5% must be the minimum rise in mpg @ high rpm if viscosity & qty are the same.

| I use Mobil 1 5W-20 Here in Msia, this is the costliest *, Bardahl * with fullerene, is the cheapest * & must be the most slippery oil.

Just out of curiosity, how much is Mobil 1 in Malaysia? (trying to compare Malaysia and Thai prices).

Bruce-in-Bangkok (correct email address for reply)

Mobil does not claim regular Mobil 1 provides a 2% increase. They do claim the new - "Mobil 1 0W-30 Advanced Fuel Economy is engineered to deliver outstanding engine protection and to offer improved fuel economy in vehicles where SAE 0W-30, 5W-30 or 10W-30 oil is recommended." They further claim (for the new grade) - " potential 2% fuel economy improvement (based on a comparison versus those grades most commonly used). Actual savings are dependent upon vehicle/engine type, outside temperature, driving conditions, adjusting tire pressure, and your current engine oil viscosity."

I am confident that if you compared "regular" Mobil 1 0W20 to the Motorcraft Sysntehtic Blend 5W20 oil, you won't detect any significant mileage improvement (assuming a careful long term comparison). Fuel economy improvments are associated with two processes - reduced pumping losses and reduced friction. Pumping losses are primarily related to the oil viscosity. 5W20 oil, at least when new, has similar viscosity in most climates whether it is synthetic or conventional. Of course in very low temperature situation, synthetic oil might provide a benefit until the engine warms up, but this is trival for most people not in Canada or Alaska. Friction reduction is mostly accomplished through additives. One interesting fact is the that the test to determine if an oil qualifies for the Energy Conserving" designation compares the oil under test to a synthetic oil. To qualify, the oil under test (either syntehtic or converntional) must demonstrate a significant improvement in fuel economy comapred to the refernce synthetic oil.

I use Mobil 1 in my Fusion and Frontier and plan to stick with it as well. I don't use it for the fuel savings.. I have compared the mileage for multiple vehicles when using Mobil 1 versus conventional oil (of the same viscosity) and never been able to detect a significant difference in fuel economy. I beleive Mobil 1 is better quality oil and that it provides superior protection to most conventional oils. Mostly I like the idea if I miss my regular oil change, I have some margin.

Ed

"Ignoramus15242" wrote in message news:CJydne3zE43oIZXVnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com...

Only 10 mpg?????

13 mpg is more what I would expect you to get.

Not likely. Although I suppos eit is possible that the service stations were using 20W50 in your truck. But even a comparison between

5W30 Mobil 1 and 20W50 Convnetional oil wouldn't expalain a 20% change in mileage. At the very most you might se a 3% change between those sorts of extreemes.

Most of my recent vehicles have shown improvements in mileage as they "break-in. But the improvements are far less than 20%, more like 3% to

7%.

Possibly. Single tank averages are subject to large errors. And basing your mileage on miles per tank is a very poor technique. Are you filling up based on the position of the gas gauge and assuming that the gauge is so accurate / consistent that this is meanignful? If you really want to know, start keeping a gas purchase log.

No way.

Ed