Letters to the Editor
-
Missing a 1?
23.2 is not 61% better than 9.4, did you mean 19.4? That's not a 61% improvement. Were they originally getting 14.4 MPG?
-
Yeah, bad numbers
There must be typos. If they started with 9.4 MPG and boosted it by 61%, they'd be getting 15.1 MPG.
-
Thanks, yes Channel 5's numbers are off
They say they went from 9.4 to 23.2 -- not a typo (they say the same thing in their video report). That's actually more than 200 percent. I added that in the story. Thanks for noticing.
-
Pathetic
It strikes me as kind of pathetic that there are either typo's or math errors that effect the very core of this story. Maybe editors DO add something to the discussion after all.
-
One other small math quiblle.
a jump from 9.4 MPG to 23.2 MPG is actually great than a 245 percent gain in gas mileage
Well, 23.2 is 247% of 9.4, but that's not a 247% gain, it is a 147% gain. The gain is 13.8 mpg.
-
Bridge for sale, and cheap
Seriously, remove this entire article, because it makes Salon looks stupid and foolish.
No, the device doesn't work, no it can't work, yes idiots will report that they do work.
These scams, and that's what they are SCAMS have been around for a very long time. They do not work.
Why don't you save money and place the magnets on your fuel line, which report to do the same thing, and save a thousand dollars?
Here's really a simple and logical test on whether these aids actually have any real World advantage. Companies like Ford, GM, and Toyota spend BILLIONS of dollars designing each car and BILLIONS of dollars trying to met Federal Minimum Gas Mileage standards. If they could get a 5% mileage increase, that would be like mana from heaven. Yet, here we are to believe that 20% to 60% increases are simply ignorned. It boggles the mind.
I had a friend who swore by these tablets you put in your gas tank, same thing. 20% increase to MPG, same friend even claimed that such an increase was personally witnessed. It's bunk, as a favor I tried said pills, exactly ZERO change. I track my mileage on every tank of gas and have since I've had my car. My friend didn't, so had no baseline in order to compare.
-
And as far as the claims go
A news van is hardly an ideal vehicle to test it on. They keep all kinds of equipment in the back of those vans so they can do their jobs. If they took out a significant amount of lighting equipment, the weight difference alone could account for the mileage difference.
-
@Lynx, kudos
Fixed.
-
Kinda Fun
I don't believe this thing works.But it would really be fun to test it on someone else's dime.Hope you can get the go ahead, I will really enjoy reading about your experiences.
-
@Xanthro, seems you've made a mistake
Sorry, looks like you confused this tech with magnets on a fuel line. That's not what this is. Can you say why you think this -- rather than the magnets thing -- is a scam? It'd be great if you can cite something. Thanks much.
-
How about a Plug In Hydra 4000....
... if the hydrolysis doesn't, in fact, work off your generator as advertised?
How about a Plug In Hydra 4000, even if it does work as advertised?
-
Hydro 4000
Oh, please. You've been punked.
-
Automotive electricity
Concerns about electricity from the alternator are not well-founded. It would defy the laws of physics for mpg to go up if the Hydro 4000 used more energy than it saved.
Normally, a source of mechanical energy (generally the engine) turns the alternator to produce electrical energy. The mechanical energy is typically generated by burning fuel. If the electrical energy required to run the Hydro 4000 exceeded its mechanical energy savings, the vehicle would use extra fuel. In other words, electricity generated by the alternator is already accounted for when measuring mpg.
The one case where it is not is if the Hydro 4000 continually draws electricity from the battery. This would be a terribly poor design and the van would eventually exhibit symptoms of a dead battery, most notably the inability to start the vehicle. I'm guessing the television station would have reported this, as it certainly would have occurred during a month of normal news van driving.
-
Dynamometer
Lynx,
Since the test was on a dynamometer I don't think the load in the van would have much impact. On them, generally, the drive wheels spin but don't have to pull the weight of the van. That should also mitigate the effect of driving style. The vehicles are spun up to constant speed and then let run. There wouldn't be a lot of starting and stopping to avoid. All of this makes it odd that the initial number was so low. I don't know if the numbers are legit, but the dynamometer should produce a very good test of feasibility.
-
Hmm.
So, they claim to have somewhat more than doubled their mileage by going from 9.4 MPG to 23.2 MPG. According to Farhad, this is a boost of over 200%.
What then would be an increase of 100% from 9.4 MPG? 9.4 MPG? How about a 50% increase? 4.7 MPG?
This seems like a very peculiar way of stating percentages.
If you double something, it has increased by 100%, and by 2X, two different ways of stating the same thing.
-
oh please
This is the dumbest waste of Salon space I have ever seen. C'mon, Maury, Jerry. What is this, TV? I come here to GET AWAY from TV stoops. Don't do more articles like this, or you are going to lose a significant portion of the Salon core audience. And believe me, I am holding back here! I hope this is not excessively rude ...
-
Faulty comparison?
Farhad, the alternator-provided electicty used by the device is being provided anyway, so the question is whether what the device uses is comparable in 'cost' as the gas it saves. I don't see how it could be even close if the imprvement is even the lower end 20%...unless the device is causing the alternator to work so much harder it burns out quickly, then you'd have to factor in the replacement cost of alternators vs the savings in gas...right?
-
I used it and I have a Masters in Industrial Engineering
I have a Masters on Industrial Engineering and back in the '80s I've tried a similar gadget in a Toyota Pick Up track, while living high in a place with snow and slit. I did save gas and I recovered my expenses for having it installed. Can't remember how much exactly but I would say about 15%. The gasoline then dropped considerably and I did not get it for my next car. I guess I just forgot about it. As for the comment about the car companies spending billions in research and not looking into this? Well, here I have a trade secret for you: no industrial company will ever adopt any technological advantage if they do not own the patent. They do invest billions in research trying to get something they can patent and have it for themselves or sell it to the competition. The only reason we have restrain systems, shock absorbing car bodies and other life-saving designs is because Mercedes Benz, who develop and patented most of them gave them to the public domain, so it would save lives industry-wide.
I am all for real scientific testing of this gadget under road conditions and let the chick fall where they do!