This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Robin Brumfield wrote:
<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 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 wrap=""><!---->Yabut isn't 1% included in that range "UPTO" 35%?
And, I believe going off a cliff with a 100 mph tail wind is required
to get upto the 35% <vbg 2><br>
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.
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:
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
That sort of thing. I do most of these and I still get pretty crappy
["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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Got any wind tunnel tests proving otherwise?
A tonneau cover can help mpg.
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" < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
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.