Go Back   iRV2 Forums > iRV2.com COMMUNITY FORUMS > iRV2.com General Discussion
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-24-2014, 11:16 AM   #29
Registered User
 
Fleetwood Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 1,857
I suspect....

The wording on the website is about the same level as the Nigerian prince scam. And this is done on purpose to evoke pity. I haven't located their server yet but my guess would be Eastern Europe. It looks like something a 14 year old criminal with just a tiny bit of HTML knowlege would create.

The 'order' page is insecure not linked to ANY online payment system.

The way the 'order' page is set up is worse than amateurish. Some of the required fields for a CC transaction are missing.

The way all the pages are set up and scroll tells me the 'programmer' doesn't know how to define a properly sized frame. This pops up another 'scam' flag.

That Motorhome Magazine accepted the add says a lot about them. And it's not good.

DON'T DO IT! If you alread did cancel that credit card ASAP.
__________________

__________________
Muddypaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-24-2014, 04:25 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
BFlinn181's Avatar
 
Gulf Streamers Club
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 16,211
In the '60's my buddy and I had a VW bug. We noted all the ads in magazines for devices to "increasie the horsepower of your VW." Using compounding %, we soon had our bug up to more than 700 hp! Of course we were smart enough not to spend a penny, but it was a great math exercise. When GM tried the variable displacement fuel saving method, they found the none firing cylinders cooled to the point of very inefficient combustion when re-started. In addition, maybe a streamlined auto could 'idle' along on the highway, but an RV is still pushing an 8' X 10' wall down the road, I doubt if too many cylinders could be rested.

As I said before, IF there was a fuel savings gadget that worked and didn't damage the engine or environment, engine manufacturers would have installed it. The competition to make engines more efficient means EVERYTHING to their bottom line.
The fact that people believe in these ideas of 'instant savings' is the very thing that also sells additives, lottery tickets, casinos, and email scams.
__________________

__________________

Bob & Donna
'98 Gulf Stream Sun Voyager DP being pushed by a '00 Beetle TDI
BFlinn181 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 10:44 PM   #31
def
Senior Member
 
def's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The heart of Dixie..Roll Tide!
Posts: 151
Send a message via Yahoo to def
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryKD View Post
Thanks cannon man,
I was excited when I saw the link. However, my excitement turned to disappointment when I went to the web site. This has to be the dumbest web site on the planet. However, I digress.

Unlike other members, without more information about the product I can make no comment. Since 1978 I have tried several fuel saving products. Some of them work, some do not work. Some of them work very well. For the soap box posters, I provide one example.

In the late 70s or earlier 80s I was reading the latest issue of Motorhome Magazine. The guy who wrote the technical column mentioned he had tested a fuel saving device. The test found no value in the device. When returning it to the company they were surprised that the test coach had not received an increase in fuel economy. The author was asked where the device was when the "before" mileage was driven. The answer was in a basement compartment. Was the basement compartment near the fuel tank? The answer was yes. The company spokesperson mentioned the device didn't actually need to be installed in the fuel line, but just near it. Whoa, this perked up my ears. The test was done again. This time the coach did have a fuel mileage increase. The increase was enough for me to purchase the device. At that time I had a Winnebago Brave, 26' long, with a Dodge 440 gas engine. The coach was purchased new. I had kept meticulous mileage records. I had also installed a 25 gallon auxiliary fuel tank up front to compliment the 50 gallon tank in the back of the coach.

The device was a solid piece of aluminum, about a foot long, with a hole drilled through the middle. The ends of the hole were threaded so fittings that matched my fuel line could be installed. To ensure as valid of a test as possible could be done, I installed the device on the fuel line for the auxiliary fuel tank. Back in those days one needed to manually switch tanks with a switch on the dash.

I ran the coach this way for over a year. The test confirmed a significant mileage increase when using the auxiliary tank fuel than when using the main tank fuel. Before the nay sayers jump all over this as best I remember I was getting an average of 6.8 to 7.8 MPG without the device and over 9 MPG with the device. After the test I installed the device so fuel from both tanks would pass through it and the mileage remained at over 9 MPG.
My criteria for gas saving devices is they:
1. must be passive
2. must not change engine or emission specs
3. must be able to DIY the install
4. must be able to remove the device
Moved this device to another coach and it did nothing to improve the fuel economy.

I have had several fuel saving devices. Some work and some do not work. Some work on one coach and not on another coach. For me, fuel saving devices are like Quantum Mechanics (for you physics majors). It is spooky.

Times have changed. From the mechanical engines of the 70s to the electronically controlled engines we have today. Would this change the performance of the fuel saving devices? I do not know. What I do know is I am using a fuel saving product (posted several times on iRV2) in my current coach. The first use of the product surpassed the manufactures claims. I have about 5 years with this product and the savings remain the same as the first day of use. My coach was getting 6.7 to 7.2 MPG without the product. The coach now gets 7.5 to 8.5 MPG with the product.

My point of this is for those who post from the pulpit (or soap box) may want to consider not be so closed minded.

To Lindsay Richards, I do have a ScanGauge installed in the coach (and in the toad too).
With reference to the mid-late 70s Dodge MH chassis, the Dodge 440 CID engine used in the M-400 Dodge MH chassis used a Carter Thermoquad carburetor.

Those carburetors typically ran rather hot on the top of that huge hunk of cast iron V8. As such, Dodge inserted a thick phenolic block between the carburetor throttle plate and the intake manifold in order to provide some insulation, reduce the overheating of the carburetor and the resulting vapor lock (fuel vaporizing in the float chambers) which was common for that engine during summer months.

Any attempts to lower fuel temperature entering the hot Thermoquad with the alloy "fuel cooler" you describe would be offset due to the fact that the Thermoquad float bowls ran so hot, the cooled fuel would be almost immediately reheated to near vaporization. I suspect the mileage improvements you observed were due to climate changes, changes in seasonal fuel RVPs and possibly a dirty carburetor (these carburetors tended to wear out toward lean as they aged).

Cooling the fuel aspirated into a gasoline engine does have merit. However, the 440 CID Dodge engine would not benefit significantly from cooled fuel during summer months due to extreme engine temperatures.

In my experience with my Dodge 440 CID MH engine, I ran a cooler thermostat which helped to reduce oil consumption as well as reduce the difficult hot starts due to hot fuel vaporization in the Thermoquad carburetor.

That 440 did have some pulling power though.
__________________
2000 HR Endeavor, 3126 CAT, Freightliner, "The Highway Hilton" pulling a BMW.
def is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 08:15 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 100
If ANY of these products actually worked, one of two things would happen:

1) big oil would buy the rights to it and destroy it

or

2) an auto company would buy the rights to it and install it on all their vehicles to increase their MPG claims, since that's a major consideration when buying a new vehicle.

The reason why most of these "work" is because, once someone installs it, they also subconsciously change their driving habits to see how much they can maximize the benefits. It's the change in driving habits that increases mpg and has nothing to do with the device itself.
__________________
dieharder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 01:42 PM   #33
def
Senior Member
 
def's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The heart of Dixie..Roll Tide!
Posts: 151
Send a message via Yahoo to def
If you watched the Daytona 500 this last weekend, you saw Dale Jr., Jeff Gordon and others turning off their fuel pumps while circling during yellow flag laps.

They were conserving fuel in order to avoid a fuel stop or running out of fuel in the final race laps.

Apparently it worked for Dale Jr.

'Nuff said.
__________________
2000 HR Endeavor, 3126 CAT, Freightliner, "The Highway Hilton" pulling a BMW.
def is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 01:50 PM   #34
def
Senior Member
 
def's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The heart of Dixie..Roll Tide!
Posts: 151
Send a message via Yahoo to def
Read this then comment....

450 Mpg Carburetors Suppressed by US Government! | Alternative

I love the part where the stuff was taken to the dump and bulldozed....that's just plain silly.
__________________
2000 HR Endeavor, 3126 CAT, Freightliner, "The Highway Hilton" pulling a BMW.
def is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 01:52 PM   #35
def
Senior Member
 
def's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The heart of Dixie..Roll Tide!
Posts: 151
Send a message via Yahoo to def
How about one of you MEs out there, do the mass-energy equation for pump gasoline and diesel fuel and report the amount of work that is possible.

I think the answer will be enlightening.
__________________
2000 HR Endeavor, 3126 CAT, Freightliner, "The Highway Hilton" pulling a BMW.
def is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 01:54 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
tedgard01's Avatar


 
Carolina Campers
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Winston Salem, NC
Posts: 3,006
If you want a fuel saving device, trade you RV in for a Smart Car... Lol
__________________
tedgard01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 01:56 PM   #37
def
Senior Member
 
def's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The heart of Dixie..Roll Tide!
Posts: 151
Send a message via Yahoo to def
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieharder View Post
If ANY of these products actually worked, one of two things would happen:

1) big oil would buy the rights to it and destroy it WHY

or

2) an auto company would buy the rights to it and install it on all their vehicles to increase their MPG claims, since that's a major consideration when buying a new vehicle. DOUBTFUL

The reason why most of these "work" is because, once someone installs it, they also subconsciously change their driving habits to see how much they can maximize the benefits. It's the change in driving habits that increases mpg and has nothing to do with the device itself. PLAUSIBLE and UNLIKELY
__________________
2000 HR Endeavor, 3126 CAT, Freightliner, "The Highway Hilton" pulling a BMW.
def is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 09:17 PM   #38
Registered User
 
Fleetwood Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 1,857
A Rule To Live By

NOTHING you read on the Internet is true!

Even this.
__________________
Muddypaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 09:32 PM   #39
Member
 
Dune Hauler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Cornell CA
Posts: 36
Have any of you tried water injection. I have achieved a .5 to .75 mpg increase and extra HP from a Snow Performance system. I did not originally install it for MPG just HP, I will gladly take both.
__________________
Dune Hauler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:19 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
Thor Owners Club
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Delaware
Posts: 536
The trouble with every one of these devices that I've ever read about is that they violate the law -- the laws of physics.

If you're going to believe in something like that, I say go all the way -- I'm holding out for a perpetual motion machine, or at least cold fusion.
__________________
Crabby Mike
2014 Tuscany 40RX
towing 2016 Grand Cherokee Overland
Crabby Mike is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 01:47 PM   #41
Senior Member


 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dune Hauler View Post
Have any of you tried water injection. I have achieved a .5 to .75 mpg increase and extra HP from a Snow Performance system. I did not originally install it for MPG just HP, I will gladly take both.
Watching many tractor pull contests, when a big diesel tractor would compete, the announcer would describe how they all use water injection for more power. Also serves to keep EGT under control.
__________________
pasdad1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 06:40 PM   #42
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dune Hauler View Post
Have any of you tried water injection. I have achieved a .5 to .75 mpg increase and extra HP from a Snow Performance system. I did not originally install it for MPG just HP, I will gladly take both.
I used to run water injection on my transam. Was running extra spark advance and 11-1 poptop pistons on street fuel, used it to combat pre ignition. Worked like a charm, exhaust temps dropped and power output went up!
__________________

__________________
Fl_Richard is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fuel



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
E15 Fuel - For those who have not been warned about it! Doggy Daddy Just Conversation 5 02-12-2014 09:18 PM
Fuel Pump issues on Donated 1994 Southwind 33L Ford nykiordan Class A Motorhome Discussions 15 02-08-2014 09:05 PM
Anybody pulled the fuel rail and injectors on 8.1L? deputydog Workhorse and Chevrolet Chassis Motorhome Forum 14 01-15-2014 07:33 PM
Fuel Tank Problems Winnibago 78 Custom On Dodge chassis mdpeat Winnebago Industries Owner's Forum 6 07-25-2013 03:27 PM

» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.