Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Video: Gas saving solutions (gizmo purports to double car mileage when traveling > 35mph)
ABC News ^ | 3/24/2008

Posted on 03/24/2008 5:45:29 AM PDT by Uncledave

No text to post - follow video.

The intriguing bit for me was the gent who invented a gizmo that he activates with a switch when he's traveling over 35 mph. He cuts the fuel to 1/2 the cylinders, and thereby increases his gas mileage to nearly double.

Obviously, passing power and hills would be more challenging with this activated, but can any engineering experts here comment if this is feasible and practical?


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: energy; gasoline
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last
To: expatpat

You’re probably right. This was a nanotechnology experiment. I guess it makes sense that you’d get more efficiency on the nano scale.


41 posted on 03/24/2008 6:54:42 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: jospehm20
I think the difference between the two systems (the old Caddy system and the current GM system) was how the valves were disabled when cutting back to a 6 or 4. I don't remember how the old system worked, and I don't know how the new system does it, but I suspect the new system must use an electronic lifter or something on the rocker arms that's actuated electronically.

This just isn't the way of the future. We are getting as good as we can with gasoline engines. Diesel, hybrid, plug in, etc. are all better ideas than this. You want a 25% improvement in gas mileage, switch to a diesel. You want sustainable, run it off soybean oil or waste cooking oil.

I've got a full size sedan with a big engine that's ok for my rare long car trip (like on vacation). I'll keep that, or maybe get a smaller conventional car for that purpose, but how many households have a second car (my wife and I have been carpooling to work for the past six or seven years, but that's not going to last much longer). We'll need a second car.

I want a nuclear powered car. Hold on...my commute is about five miles. I run an errand on the way home, maybe got to dinner, say 15 miles per day. Give me a plug in electric car that's good for 40 or 50 miles on a nights charge, and charge it off a nuke heavy electric grid. That's no problem from an engineering standpoint. Maybe something that will give me 80 miles on an eight hour charge? If they can't do that they will be able to soon. It would be a second car, not my household's only car. I have the dinosaur powered car for trips, and my wife can drive it to work. If every two car household did that, and we build nuclear power plants, we could greatly decrease our oil needs.

42 posted on 03/24/2008 6:59:49 AM PDT by NYFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave
My GMC pickup already does that. Cutting the fuel any more and it would not run which would more than double the fuel but a dead engine means you don't go any where. You can save the world by going to alcohol and get 50% less gas millage. When you look at the economy tuns that they used to do with specially prepared cars, they did not get much better than 100 mpg and with the way they had to drive to get that they would be run off the road by irate motorists.

The problem with poor economy is that people do not know how to drive and their vehicles are improperly tuned. I have an instantaneous millage display on my truck and people's driving habits suck.

43 posted on 03/24/2008 7:03:36 AM PDT by mountainlion (Concerned Conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

One of the issues with the GM V864 systems was they were trying to get it to work with a carburetor and distributor.

The system used a solenoid to disable a rocker arm, preventing fuel and air from being sucked into the engine by closing the intake valve, IIRC.

On top of that, the electronic controls of the era were pretty crude.

The system GM uses now is quite different. With computer control over the spark and injection on a per cylinder basis, the level of control is enormous in comparison. Modern powertrain computers are very much up to the task.

Also, IIRC, someone at GM realized you don’t need to monkey around with the valves like they did originally. If you just prevent fuel and spark from entering the disabled cylinders, then the power used by compressing air on the up stroke is nearly recovered by the air pushing back on the down. You get rid of the problemmatic valvetrain tinkering, and the losses from friction from the disabled cylinders are eclipsed by the mileage gain.


44 posted on 03/24/2008 7:07:07 AM PDT by chrisser (Obama: panem et circenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: IllumiNaughtyByNature
Was that like the ZR1 that you could put into valet-mode and lock down half the engine?

Yep, I think it's the same idea. The ZR-1 used a separate key switch for that, though. Speaking of the ZR-1, the LT-5 engine's successor - the Cadillac Northstar - first reintroduced GM's variable-displacement technology. GM didn't use it to boost fuel economy, though. Instead, it used the system to cut off fuel to cylinders (up to 4, I think) and pump air through them as a "limp-home" cooling system.

45 posted on 03/24/2008 7:09:25 AM PDT by Charles Martel (The Tree of Liberty thirsts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Charles Martel
With all the technology in engines now, the ability to regulate fuel efficiency is way past its due.

Its industry dragging its feet IMO.

46 posted on 03/24/2008 7:13:07 AM PDT by IllumiNaughtyByNature (Senator McCain, what did GWB promise you back in 2000? And you believed him? BWAHAAAAA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Perhaps one of the big three could throw a little money at small diesel tech also. VW hybrid Jetta gets 68 mpg; that’s cost-effective even at $4.00/gal for diesel. Imagine a diesel/hybrid 300 or Lincoln.


47 posted on 03/24/2008 7:27:54 AM PDT by steve8714 (What hand does a Muslim amputee eat with?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Ah, yes, Lucas. That’s why the Brits enjoy warm beer, Lucas refrigerators.


48 posted on 03/24/2008 7:32:23 AM PDT by wizr ("Give me liberty, or give me death." - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NYFriend
If we can sweep the Nervous Nellies on the green side out of the way, this is the future. Cars powered by electricity for short hops. Liquid fuels for the long runs.
49 posted on 03/24/2008 7:33:04 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (ENERGY CRISIS made in Washington D. C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Perhaps one of the big three could throw a little money at small diesel tech also.

I'd like to see that too. I believe they are doing some things in Europe, but I don't follow it too much lately.
50 posted on 03/24/2008 8:05:32 AM PDT by chrisser (Obama: panem et circenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: nevergore
Hey ise spentz lotza time at gawgia tech .... we got lotza thangs started wit a pull tab. If ya nose wotz ah meanz, vern. I got “buzzed” at tech!

And I am not knocking Tech in the least either. One of the finest schools in the country.

51 posted on 03/24/2008 8:15:31 AM PDT by HiramQuick (work harder ... welfare recipients depend on you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

Just a point of correction about car alternators.

They are three-phase, full-wave rectified alternators, producing six voltage peaks per revolution. None of the six half-waves are “discarded.”


52 posted on 03/24/2008 8:20:56 AM PDT by Erasmus (Nihilism never amounted to anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Stories about how OPEC will buy this technology to begin in 5...4...3...2...


53 posted on 03/24/2008 8:25:03 AM PDT by SlapHappyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PLMerite

Just count yourself fortunate you had a Jaguar that ran.


54 posted on 03/24/2008 8:26:13 AM PDT by SlapHappyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
Only one thing: Honda has this system available on their V-6 engines for at least three years. In fact, Honda updated their system for the 2008 model year so you have either six, four and three cylinder operation.

In the latest Consumer Reports issue, they state, "Despite Honda's cylinder deactivation system, the V6 Honda Accord we tested got slightly worse fuel economy than the previous one."

Not really very encouraging ...

55 posted on 03/24/2008 8:27:53 AM PDT by webschooner (A Conservative voting for Juan McCain is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SlapHappyPappy

“Just count yourself fortunate you had a Jaguar that ran.”

Well, it didn’t a lot of the time. Unless you consider getting 6 miles to the Imperial Gallon (5 quarts) “running.”

I think your average Sherman tank got only a little less than that.


56 posted on 03/24/2008 8:29:53 AM PDT by PLMerite ("Unarmed, one can only flee from Evil. But Evil isn't overcome by fleeing from it." Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

I once read that a study determined 60% of all “news items” were generated via press release.

I am assuming the source of the story was the researchers’ own press release.


57 posted on 03/24/2008 8:29:59 AM PDT by SlapHappyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: PLMerite
I owned 4 Jaguars in my misspent youth. They all ran great after I figured out how to solve their very similar problems. Delco made several electrical parts that were interchangeable with Joe Lucas. Mallory made a first rate distributor that was 100 times better than OEM.
58 posted on 03/24/2008 9:17:08 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (ENERGY CRISIS made in Washington D. C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: HiramQuick

Heck no, ya’ can’t knock GA Tech.....

Where else in the world can you go to witness cold fusion????

Pssssttt...BTW, I’ve got the only Flux Capacitor left in existence that I can sell you cheap......meet me by the Varsity if ya’ want it...


59 posted on 03/24/2008 9:59:31 AM PDT by nevergore ("It could be that the purpose of my life is simply to serve as a warning to others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Gorzaloon; PLMerite

What? Mine had 12 cylinders, so it never ran on less than 8.


60 posted on 03/24/2008 10:02:42 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (Free New York)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson