Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Every once in a while I would go out to the R&D organization and look in the warehouse where they put all those carburators, and their design documents, test results, etc that the company had bought up. There were dozens of them!!!!
The company merged with another major. They then combined both companies bought-up carbs. It made an even larger amount.
As I understood it, there was a rotation list of major oil companys names. Whenever one of these devices came near to being marketed, or having widespread public knowledge, the next company on the rotation list had to 'take care' of it.
Fuel injection then came along. Since it had gotten into the public eye years ago, there wasn't much to be done about it. Mercedes, Corvettes, etc had developed it years ago. The car makers really needed it to reach the new government polution specifications. So, the auto manufactors started using them.
But, when the private inventers started improving on it, just like they had done with the carb, and getting V6 fuel injected motors up over 200mpg, the oil companies started buying them up too. The last trip I took to the warehouse, the latest positions in there were the new high-milage fuel injection systems.
And just think, I've only seem the storage for 2 majors. Think about what is out there in the other majors storage bins. It must be hundreds and hundreds.
It's the truth.
I love stories like this!
Not much they could do then.
Oil companies don't need to block Detroit from introducing innovation. They've always been very good at preventing it themselves.
A carburator couldn't possibly give the same mpg as fuel injection. It is too imprecise an instrument, being mechanically controlled and almost impossible to interface accurately with engine management systems.
Probably the Europeans hit the optimum mpg you could achieve with a carburator on a real car driven on real roads at real speeds, something around 40 mpg in a Renault 4CV. But these were very small engines.
Eight big American pistons are going to gobble fuel unless you have some very sophisticated controls and overdrive gearing(e.g., Corvette).
So I think all claims for high mileage carburators are groundless.
"We must destroy that genius inventor Shiftright. The stakes are too high!"
I was so smart, I scared three major oil companies into making me lose my business due to bad research, no backing money, and unreliable suppliers...
I remember the articles and people talking about it but I never actually saw one.
Here's a good explanation why it didn't, doesn't and never will work:
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/fish3.htm
Here's a good explanation why it didn't, doesn't and never will work:
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/fish3.htm
Again, I am curious as to what this device is.
over the last 27 years, I have seen alot of things that made pretty staunch claims and I have tried most of them.
In most cases, you can debunk the product, just by looking through the MSDS of the product.
In some cases, they come out with a product that actually works to a point, but really isn't worth the money, time and modifications for it.
As with any product, if it sound too good to be true, then it probably is.
I had a K&N installed on my Suburban. No difference in mileage. I was a bit disappointed as it was noticeably noisier.
Adding air alone without adding fuel isn't going to do very much, nor is adding fuel without adding air (which is what chips do, add fuel enrichment to the OEM map which tends to favor leanness). You want POWER you are going to have to maintain about a 13:1 ratio of air/fuel and if you upset this, you lose. You can run leaner for fuel mileage but you'll run hotter and have less power...you can add richness and maybe get a few HP out of that at certain power band positions.
If you clean it regularly, like every third oil change with mine, and oil lightly like you're supposed to, it's not remotely an issue. If you use half a can on the cool red oil, you'll have problems, and you (non-specific person, not directed at anyone) deserve to, since you can't read directions.
For people who are racing, they are used to risks to machines and their physical bodies. They expect an occasional disaster and are usually equipped to deal with it.
But many folks unfortunately embrace these oiled filters like they were miracle drugs or something.
I've used K&Ns, (but not any more) and really, if you follow directions explicitly, it's a bit tedious to oil and clean them "by the book". I would imagine a lot of folks don't have the patience.
If you change gas stations or where you fill up you can skew the results. Also a 1 mpg gain or loss would be statistically plausible even if you did nothing different and used no additive.
Could be my imagination but the engine already feels smoother after one day!
20 more miles on a tank won't prove anything---the wind could cause that on any given day. Unless you record gas mileage over many fill ups there is really no evidence here.
What I know about diesel engines you can write on the back of a cigarette packet, however I'm a business man who has told about a potential opportunity involving a new invention. I wonder if I could trouble anyone who would care to reply for their advice concerning the following questions. All answers gratefully received.
Here is some basic background information
2 engineers one an electronics expert and the other a petrol chemical engineer claims to have developed a product which when fitted to any haulage truck will guarantee a minimum of 20% diesel fuel consumption as well as reduced emissions.
So far they claim to have it installed on 100 trucks which have provided them with the data that supports their claims.
They are now seeking to market the product commercially and have appointed a small marketing company which knows nothing about diesel engines. the cost of the product is anticipated to be in the order of $20,000.
They went to a major truck manufacturer who they claim was very interested in the product but required a two year validation period. They were not prepared to wait and are now considering road hauliers.
I need to know the following
1. If their claims are true would 20% decrease in fuel consumption be of major interest to road hauliers with a $20,000 price tag?
2. What technical questions should I ask them to validate their claims ?
3. I am considering entering into a franchise or direct sales agreement with them but I need to make sure that I'm not being sold down the river and given the price that there is a market for their product.
Thanks in advance for your replies
Epicentre
1. What is the mechanism for which fuel economy increases? If it is a simple computer chip swap, the markup would be about 20-fold (personal trucks sell chip setups for $1-2K) and the results are typically haphazard. If it is an actual device, tell them you will need to see the schematic and US patent #.
2. How long is the product guaranteed and who will honor the guarantee after 3 years (i.e. are the owners moving to the Virgin Islands at the end of year 1)? A semi truck probably gets about 5 mpg with a 20 % gain resulting in 6 mpg. To pay off an initial investment of 20 K, a minimum of about 250,000 miles would have to be driven with gas in the $2.50 / gallon range. Is the device transferable to another engine? What is the expected life of the device? Thus, there is the potential for money savings, however, the 20 % gain must be guaranteed for at least 250,000 miles and preferably indefinitely with no additional maintenance costs. Remember that a diesel engine can last about 300,000 to 500,000 miles if taken care of, significantly longer than a gas engine,
3. What is the cost of the part? The 100 vehicles that have been fitted would have cost possibly over $1,000,000 already and $2,000,000 if they are selling at cost. How long have the vehicles been tested (surely over 250,000 miles if they expect to get $20 K) and who paid for the testing?
4. The description about two engineers also makes me leary. The "electronics expert" makes me think this is a computer chip based device, which makes $20 K absurdly expensive. I am not aware of any chemical engineers that know a hoot about diesel engines. Mechanical engineers would be responsible for designing machined parts to be fitted to an engine.
However, let's presume that there IS this chip and that it DOES give a 20% increase.
Now the question I would ask as a fleet manager is WHAT does this chip do to get that mileage? Am I leaning out this engine dangerously? Am I screwing around with something that shouldn't be screwed around with?
From my experience, reliability is a far more significant factor with fleets than a couple MPG. They can usually pass the fuel costs on to the consumer (and they do, which is why your apples cost more than two years ago), but if the apples don't ever get there, they "eat" them so to speak.
So I agree whoeheartedly with the others---if the inventors will not fully disclose to you the engineering principles behind this device, I wouldn't touch it. And the price is VERY suspicious. It sounds like a grab and run scheme based on that alone. A fleet could fit all kinds of aero devices, better lubricants and filters and higher maintenance to get better MPG, for less money per truck than that.
Voodoo...pure and simple!
Many thanks to all of you who responded to my request for advice concerning this new invention. Your replies were excellent and gave me plenty to think about. I've since spoken to the marketing company and they have been able to give me more information which I would be grateful if you could let me have your further opinions on.
1. The device uses a combination of LPG (Liquid Pressurised Gas) with diesel, I know this is nothing new, however they claim the electronics optimises the firing cycle in combination with LPG.
2. They claim they have run tests with a single truck over 150k miles and the resulting diesel consumption was reduced by 37% therefore they guarantee a minimum of 20%
3. As for the price of the unit, they do not intend to sell them, rather they insist on a monthly lease over three years and wish to retain ownership of the device after the lease period and charge only a peppercorn rent thereafter. Apparently the electronic control also contains some sort of satalite vehicle location tracking program which can be software upgraded.
4. Apparently Mercedes Benze Truck division have expressed an interest to license the product but require 2 years to evaluate it within their quality system which is too long for the inventor.
5. Apparently upon emission testing, the emissions where so low that they could hardly be detected. The testers thought the emission equipment was faulty but concluded this was not the case and the emissions were simply extremely low.
Does this sound more feesable or more worrying ?
Thanks one again in advance for your thoughts on this
Kind regards
Epicentre
One other thing. They said the diesel consumption was 37% less. What was the LPG consumption?
And IF they could show some data to back up their claims, I would have to see the approval that they have from DEQ and EPA that will attest to the fact that the engine would still maintain the EPA standards. Not likely.
EPA standards must be met and maintained in order for any manufacturer to endorse or condone anything being installed on their engines. Anything that voids the manufacturer's warranty on a heavy truck is junk. Plain and simple.
So now, with that said and remembering that when you talk about heavy truck fleet, that is what I do, I will address some of the things you commented on.
So this may be long, so I will split it into 2 separate posts.
1. The device uses a combination of LPG (Liquid Pressurized Gas) with diesel, I know this is nothing new, however they claim the electronics optimizes the firing cycle in combination with LPG.
LPG is the equivelant of Nitrous oxide to a diesel engine. While it is great for boosting power on a diesel, long term affects on the engine are controversial. I have seen several LPG boosted engines with destroyed pistons, while I have also seen many without problems. So, until someone can come up with firm, controlled data on what the long term, constant use would be for all manufacturers, LPG will never see the trucks in the fleet I work on.
2. They claim they have run tests with a single truck over 150k miles and the resulting diesel consumption was reduced by 37% therefore they guarantee a minimum of 20%
As was stated, I would like to know the LPG consumption. I can run a multi-fuel engine that will run 50% less diesel, if I switch to another fuel.
What engine were they running? What transmission? What gear ratios on the differentials? What year was the truck?
3. As for the price of the unit, they do not intend to sell them, rather they insist on a monthly lease over three years and wish to retain ownership of the device after the lease period and charge only a peppercorn rent thereafter. Apparently the electronic control also contains some sort of satalite vehicle location tracking program which can be software upgraded.
:lemon: Ok, this is the point where the salesman would find the door in 90% of the fleets they will deal with. Very few fleets will allow much of anything to be installed on their trucks that they don't own outright. Leasing anything is a pain and if something should happen to the unit, they are out the cost.
And for what reason would they have to put a location tracking program on it?
I would like to see the copy of the letter of intent in order to believe such a claim.
5. Apparently upon emission testing, the emissions where so low that they could hardly be detected. The testers thought the emission equipment was faulty but concluded this was not the case and the emissions were simply extremely low.
So let me get this straight. Caterpillar, Detroit, Navistar, Mercedes and Isuzu all had to file extensions because they couldn't meet the 2004 DEQ/EPA regulations for emissions, but all they had to do was install this device and they could exceed those standards?? :confuse:
Remember, when you are talking about a diesel, hardly detectable emissions isn't that achievable. Soot from diesel is there no matter what, which is why they have gone to catalytic converters on diesels, to try and cut down the amount of unburned HCs [soot].
As someone who has been dealing with diesels for over 25 years, I find this claim extremely hard to believe.
Does this sound more feesable or more worrying ?
From the information provided, I would have to say NO, it doesn't sound feasible.
There are so many reasons why this reeks of snake oil salesmen, but it is a possibility.
One thing you have to remember about anything that is claiming to improve fuel economy and emissions, is that in order for these things to be approved by DEQ and EPA, there are so many things that they have to prove, not claim.
If these things cannot be proven, then the manufacturers can deny any warranty on an engine with this equipment installed and no fleet will take that chance.
1. A patent is required to avoid reverse engineering problems that will siphon business (it will already happen from overseas competition, but a US patent will give some protection). Get the # and expiration date.
2. What happened to the "100 trucks" fitted with the system? One truck is crap. 100 trucks with the system compared to 100 without would be legitimate statistical proof of an actual mpg improvement (a minimum of 30 trucks is needed). A large part of the mpg improvement might simply be from good engine tolerances of that specific truck.
3. Leasing the part is a complete 180 degree turn from charging $20 K and a purchase. What is with the huge change in business strategy? Now a whole new set of break-even parameters are required for a lease coupled with LPG refilling costs.
4. I think fleet managers would not give a rat's [non-permissible content removed] about emissions as long as the emissions do not EXCEED a certain maximum. Why are they harping on this aspect?
Just wanted to express my sincere thanks to all of you who responded to my emails for advice. The wealth of knowledge and exprience on this site about diesel engines speaks for itself. You have all given me a lot to think about and questions I can put to the team representing this inventor.
I am going to be meeting with them on Tuesday 14th next week to receive a presentation and ask as many questions as I like. You can bet that I will be putting many of the points you identified to them.
Just to answer one of the questions raised by John500 regarding the lease strategy versus purchase. Apparently the list price for one these items is approx $20,000 . This was percieved as being prohibitive for truck owners to find, therefore
the inventor has a deal with a lease company (financial house) who purchases the unit up front but leases the unit to the truck owners over a 3 year term. At the end of the lease the truck owners pay a greatly reduced peppercorn rent but never own the device. The peppercorn rent entitles the truck owners free software upgrades as required.
Apparently the inventor also has an insurance policy which indeminfies the truck owner against any damages or loss for the first year should the product malfunction in any way. I believe there is also reduced cover for years 2 and 3 but I'm not sure what the terms are.
I know this may all be pie in the sky and I wish I had some decent knowledge about diesel / LPG engines, however at least I've been fortunate to find this site and ask the wealth of experience on it, THANK YOU ALL once again
If nobody has any objections, I would like to keep you all posted as to the outcome of the meeting, who knows, if it turns out to be genuine, the world is a big place and you may want to exploit the opportunity for yourselves
Thanks and regards
Epicentre
Why, why, why, why would you take an interest in an investment area where you admit you have no 'decent knowledge'????????
Run away, run away, run away!!!!!!!
PureEnergySystems also says this, by the way:
"CAUTION: Acetone degrades cheaper plastics. While we would expect that all components used in all automobiles would be of a more durable nature, this may not necessarily be the case."
One screw up in your fuel injection system and all the gas "savings" are out the window, BIG TIME.
If it were all true, a gas station could easily add it to their underground tanks and totally annihilate every other gas station within a five mile radius.
Why don't they? Obviously, fear of product liability.
Does anyone know of a company that designs software for an OBD-II interface that apply's a little expert knowlege and suggests to the user what could be the cause of poor / off-design fuel economy? Is it even practical?
It seems many posters in the past few months are complaining of poor fuel economy (no surprise with the cost of fuel right)?
While the OBD-II interface can be used to read and reset codes and look at real-time parameters for different devices that are monitored, it would seem there would be a market to design software that would help localize the root cause of poor engine fuel economy / performance. I realize they can help locate causes of poor emissions, but what about the fuel economy portion of the equation?