Gas Saver Question.

idon' snipped-for-privacy@thinkso.com says...


a ltr) I was thinking of looking into these things. I'm not writing this to be flamed in any way but rather to get constructive inputs.

Yabut isn't 1% included in that range "UPTO" 35%? <VBG>
--
Robin
Charleston, WV
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

upto
($1.16 a ltr) I was thinking of looking into these things. I'm not writing this to be flamed in any way but rather to get constructive inputs.

so is 0%
--
-Chris
05 CTD
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net says...

Ding...Ding...Ding...give that man a seegar...:-)
--
Robin
Charleston, WV
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070805010605070000000207 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Robin Brumfield wrote:

</pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Here goes, has anyone actually tried a Ramjet Gas Saver? They claim upto 35% in savings, hard to believe. But with the price of gas these day ($1.16 a ltr) I was thinking of looking into these things. I'm not writing this to be flamed in any way but rather to get constructive inputs.
Thanks in advance. </pre> </blockquote> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> From the conclusion in the PM article sited above (by JohanB) "There's no ignoring the laws of physics, people. Your vehicle already burns over 99 percent of the fuel you pay for. Less than 1 percent is squandered as partially burned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide before the exhaust hits the catalytic converter for the last laundering. Even if one of these miracle gadgets could make the combustion process 100 percent complete, the improvement in mileage resulting would be 1 percent. Any device that claims quantum-level increases needs to be examined with considerable skepticism."
</pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""><!---->Yabut isn't 1% included in that range "UPTO" 35%? &lt;VBG&gt; </pre> </blockquote> And, I believe going off a cliff with a 100 mph tail wind is required to get upto the 35% &lt;vbg 2&gt;<br> </body> </html>
--------------070805010605070000000207--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You deserve every flame that comes your way on this. The question has come up numerous times and the answer is always the same. A tiny bit of research on your part would reveal how stupid your question really is. If someone here could ever find such a product, we would not hide it from the public. We would scream from the bell towers. You are exactly the type of person that these scammers depend on for profit. Next month they change the color or wording on the magic device and you will be back asking the same question. Some people can be told the fire on the stove is hot and understand while others need to touch it for themselves time after time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Al Bundy wrote:

You are right but I wouldn't be too hard on him. With the price of fuel rising, we all wish there were something that we could easily do to stretch out a tank.
On the same topic, we've also gone through the debate of whether leaving your tailgate open will improve airflow and milage. It makes it worse by a little bit. There is a really great study on this with tailgate, tonneaus and canopies being tested but I can't rememeber where it is now.
Also on topic are Teflon coatings etc such as Slick 50. There is a good page on these here:
http://skepdic.com/slick50.html
The only ways I know to save gas are:
- don't drive - drive like a grandpa and go easy on the gas - plan trips when traffic is thinner - keep the truck tuned up and in order - don't use knobbier tires than you need and keep them at proper inflation. But I LIKE knobby tires... - ignore that moron in the Dodge beside you that wants to prove his truck is faster than yours. It's just going to cost you in gas. - if it is an option, pick the right gear ratio for the type of driving you do.
That sort of thing. I do most of these and I still get pretty crappy milage.
Stephen N.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.autos.dodge.trucks.]
Stephen N. wrote:

It was done by the Mythbusters.
Episode 43: ...Returning to shore, Adam and Jamie hit the road in a fuel efficiency special. They seek to answer the age-old question: Does driving with your pickup's tailgate down save gas and, hence, money? premiere: Nov. 16, 2005
Summary here: http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2005/11/episode_43_seasickness_cures_f.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
the tailgate episode tested 2 identical ford trucks of the new vintage. I would like to see if the results hold true on Older body styles.
on a side note I was reading some where that tire pressure had a big influence on MPG on late model trucks.. it seems that most dealers under inflate the tries)low side of recommended range) so as to improve the ride, where as most modern tires actually can run very high pressures
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I can tell you from first hand experience that tail-gate down on an 81 Chevy C10 deluxe longbed (20 gal tank) get's better mpg with it down vs. up. I used to drive to Penn State alot and my total round trip was 400.1 miles (door-to-door) - tail-gate up, i'd need to refuel at the KoP rest stop on the turnpike, tail gate down took me all the way home with enough gas to get to work the next day. This was originally a 6cyl. truck that I swapped a V8 350 motor into (out of an 89 IROC - roller cam motor, switched over to carbureted with an edelbrock intake and a 74 quadrobog off a big block). So it had the 6cyl. gearing but I had 31" tires on it (it pulled high 14's/low 15's in the 1/4 mile). Now why is it this thing would get better then 20mpg highway, when my modern fuel injected 02 dakota R/T is lucky to see 15-16 mpg highway (and with a 4 speed auto vs. a three speed auto to boot). I just don't get it. Hell my 1971 VW Fastback 1.6L with dual carbs got 30mpg, same as just about every new fuel injected car out there. Just goes to show that modern fuel injection is only there for emissions reasons and made no improvement on mpg.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
i hate to admit it. BUT!
GM (and the jap/korean imports) seem to have a better handle on fuel management than ford or chrysler does. my step dad had a 88 c1500 (yes a c truck not k) with the 350 and got 22 highway. ive never owned a dodge (until now with the 05) that could reach those numbers. even still i like the dodges MUCH better than GM's crap.
--
-Chris
05 CTD
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Todd wrote:

I doubt that. Every single wind tunnel test ever done on consumer pickups has shown an increase in drag when the tail gate is lowered. No reputable test has ever shown a lower drag coefficient which would be required to improve your mpg. Some other reason accounted for your gains but it was not the tail gate.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, I'll have to dissagree. On a longbed pickup, tailgate down or off DOES make a measurable difference. So does a tonneau cover. On some shortboxes the difference is less pronounced, but on my old Fargo (short box) it made almost 4mpg difference at highway speeds. I generally drove it with the tonneau on. ***
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:

And I'll have to disagree with ya! It's been done over and over with regards to wind tunnel testing. There is more drag with the tail gate down. It's been well proven time and again. Read up on the physics of why that is.
http://www.hellerauto.com/faqs.htm http://horsepowersports.com/gas-mileage-and-pickup-tailgates / http://www.looksmarttrucks.com/p/articles/mi_qa3828/is_200405/ai_n9439015
Got any wind tunnel tests proving otherwise?
A tonneau cover can help mpg.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This whole argument is meaningless and depending on given situations, either case can be true.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving
"miles" < snipped-for-privacy@nopers.com> wrote in message
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TBone wrote:

Not usually. In almost all cases dropping the tailgate will increase drag. However, most tests done indicate the difference is not enough to see a change in mpg.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Miles has been on the money about this imo. I've not heard of any wind tunnel test that suggest a lessening of drag with the tail gate down or removed.
Roy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The thing Roy is that most people don't drive in wind tunnels and from what I see, seldom in completely stock trucks either. I agree that in base stock form, it is unusual for the truck to do better with the tailgate down as this was done by design. But if you change the angle of the truck, put something in the bed, add a bug deflector or perhaps an external sun visor, now you are changing the aerodynamics of the vehicle and the airflow into the bed can be significantly changed.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving
"Roy" < snipped-for-privacy@home.net> wrote in message
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

situations,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.