double your gas mileage?

[TheTopher]

Ok, I'm going to try to lay this issue to rest.

I gave in and tried using Acetone once. I had a good baseline of fuel economy set up - I had calculated it over several tanks of gas and the average was around 19 mpg, plus or minus about .65 mpg. Tried the Acetone for several tankfuls with the same driving habits and calculated my fuel economy. There was absolutely NO noticeable change. None. Nada. No increase or decrease (except to my wallet for buying the acetone). Truck didn't run any better on it or any worse either. I've gotten more gains out of changing spark plugs and running a can of Seafoam through a motor than with acetone.

You want to know the best way to increase your fuel economy? (aside from buying a more fuel efficient vehicle that is). Run pure gasoline, not this crap that they push on us anymore with "up to 10% ethanol" or "Winter blended gas" or the new one "up to 15% ethanol." When I could still get pure gas locally for my Ranger, I was able to get 21-23 mpg around town with a tonneau cover and 300# in the bed. With 100# in the bed and the bed cover I was able to get up to 31 mpg highway. With this ethanol crap, my flex-fuel rated Ranger went from 21-23 around town to 17 mpg. And with ethanol in the winter blend it went down to 15 mpg.

My F-150 is no better. I was getting 13 mpg with the ethanol blend. Now with winter gas I'm getting 11 mpg. I'd bet that with pure gasoline I'd be up closer to 17 mpg around town.

The F-350 here with a 460 gets 8 mpg. Not sure if it still applies, but they used to only put the ethanol in 87 octane. Jumping up to 89 octane gas we gained about 2 mpg around town.

A fantastic post, to be sure. But this topic will never be put to rest...like that fugly ranger with the mustang front end. It's just going to keep getting posted every other month no matter what we do.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

A fantastic post, to be sure. But this topic will never be put to rest...like that fugly ranger with the mustang front end. It's just going to keep getting posted every other month no matter what we do.

Probably, but at least I tried.

Oh, and if anyone questions it, I have every gas slips to prove it. Every time I fill up, I write the mileage on the slip and file it away. I'll also write any little notes on there that pertain to things (like if I didn't completely fill the tank and the next time I fill it completely I put another note). I do that with all of my trucks. Makes it real easy to figure out if something is wrong or if something I did helped. It's also the reason why I know that three times now I've had 5 gallons stolen from my trucks. I use locking gas caps now and am waiting to catch the responsible party.

 

[ElleShooTiger]

My other car is a 2006 Murano, its gets around 22 mpg overall between city and highway driving. There's not a huge difference on the highway, maybe 25 mpg or so. Last summer, I escorted an 18 wheeler with a $8 million turbine from Dallas to Houston, TX. Due to the size of the crate, we couldnt go more than 50-60mph otherwise it would sway like hell. During that trip, I averaged around 40 mpg!!!

Drive 55 on the highway and you might find a huge boost in mpgs! City driving is still going to suck, no way to improve it.

But then I drive a lot, and 55 mph is extremely boring and will put you to sleep lol, and the gas savings dont amount to crap when it means you're in the car 1-2 hours longer on a 400 mile trip. $20 for 2 hours of my time, nah.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

My other car is a 2006 Murano, its gets around 22 mpg overall between city and highway driving. There's not a huge difference on the highway, maybe 25 mpg or so. Last summer, I escorted an 18 wheeler with a $8 million turbine from Dallas to Houston, TX. Due to the size of the crate, we couldnt go more than 50-60mph otherwise it would sway like hell. During that trip, I averaged around 40 mpg!!!

Drive 55 on the highway and you might find a huge boost in mpgs! City driving is still going to suck, no way to improve it.

But then I drive a lot, and 55 mph is extremely boring and will put you to sleep lol, and the gas savings dont amount to crap when it means you're in the car 1-2 hours longer on a 400 mile trip. $20 for 2 hours of my time, nah.

It really depends on the vehicle. In my Ranger, cruising at 55 around here I had to be in 4th gear or use overdrive and drop down to 4th every grade I came to. But if I cranked it up to 70, I could run overdrive without downshifting and get better fuel economy. So when I'd get on the highway, I'd just wind 'er up to 70 and cruise because that's where I got my fuel economy. Different gears or a different tire size would throw that off though. Stock tires I could run at 60-65 in overdrive and get the same result.

 

[88_Eddie]

this is ALL you need, geez....dont yall watch tv at 3 o'clock in the morning?

no, but if you want better gas mileage, go buy a prius or a moped or a bicycle. i'm gonna let you in on a secret............it's a truck!!! you're gonna get shitty gas mileage compared to other automobiles. and until we invent some miracle fuel that's plentiful and cost effective enough to replace oil, it's not gonna change. go get a part time job if you cant afford to put gas in your truck.

 

[--weezl--]

If you drive that much in a year it may be worthwhile to get a fuel efficient wagon (a lot hold almost as much as a Ranger). If you can get 45mpg+ in a Golf TDI or Jetta Sportwagon TDI you'll be trippling your fuel economy. When I must double my fuel economy, I drive my wife's Honda. My Ranger doesn't see too many long trips anymore because I've come to accept that it wasn't built to be fuel efficient.

true, but i don't have the money for a second vehicle, and i like my ranger... i can afford to put gas in my truck, but if i can increase the economy, why not?

This is the point everybody is trying to make:
If you get an extra 2mpg over 5 tanks of gas but erode your fuel line and pieces of the fuel line clog the fuel filter, how much money did you save? What if those pieces of fuel line get stuck in the fuel pump?

how would pieces of fuel line get stuck in the fuel pump? the pump is in the tank... but i understand what you are trying to say... like i said i would want to put a piece of fuel line in a jar of pure acetone to see what happens

Ok, I'm going to try to lay this issue to rest.

I gave in and tried using Acetone once. I had a good baseline of fuel economy set up - I had calculated it over several tanks of gas and the average was around 19 mpg, plus or minus about .65 mpg. Tried the Acetone for several tankfuls with the same driving habits and calculated my fuel economy. There was absolutely NO noticeable change. None. Nada. No increase or decrease (except to my wallet for buying the acetone). Truck didn't run any better on it or any worse either. I've gotten more gains out of changing spark plugs and running a can of Seafoam through a motor than with acetone.

You want to know the best way to increase your fuel economy? (aside from buying a more fuel efficient vehicle that is). Run pure gasoline, not this crap that they push on us anymore with "up to 10% ethanol" or "Winter blended gas" or the new one "up to 15% ethanol." When I could still get pure gas locally for my Ranger, I was able to get 21-23 mpg around town with a tonneau cover and 300# in the bed. With 100# in the bed and the bed cover I was able to get up to 31 mpg highway. With this ethanol crap, my flex-fuel rated Ranger went from 21-23 around town to 17 mpg. And with ethanol in the winter blend it went down to 15 mpg.

My F-150 is no better. I was getting 13 mpg with the ethanol blend. Now with winter gas I'm getting 11 mpg. I'd bet that with pure gasoline I'd be up closer to 17 mpg around town.

The F-350 here with a 460 gets 8 mpg. Not sure if it still applies, but they used to only put the ethanol in 87 octane. Jumping up to 89 octane gas we gained about 2 mpg around town.

my question for you, your tests, were they done with the 10% ethanol, or pure gas? what temperatures did you test this in? reason i ask, is there was mention about the acetone helping relieve surface tension, temperature would probably make a difference in effectiveness, other factors is it's reaction with ethanol and other additives in fuel (if you think the pure fuel you get is actually pure fuel, you have a lot of learning to do! the reason your fuel pumps don't rust is because there is anti rust agents in gas, there are also detergents to help clean your valves

no, but if you want better gas mileage, go buy a prius or a moped or a bicycle. i'm gonna let you in on a secret............it's a truck!!! you're gonna get shitty gas mileage compared to other automobiles. and until we invent some miracle fuel that's plentiful and cost effective enough to replace oil, it's not gonna change. go get a part time job if you cant afford to put gas in your truck.

again as i said, i realize it's a truck, i don't expect it to get 45 mpg, but if i could make it get 45 mpg, why wouldn't i? provided there are no significant risks... like i said, i can afford to fill my tank, but if i can reduce the number of dollars i put into my tank in a week, why wouldn't i?

and for anyone who says that they don't care about gas mileage, i'll send you my paypal and you can send my $5 a week for any week you drive your truck...

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

true, but i don't have the money for a second vehicle, and i like my ranger... i can afford to put gas in my truck, but if i can increase the economy, why not?

That same thought is probably why so many people try all the things out there that claim to increase fuel economy.

how would pieces of fuel line get stuck in the fuel pump? the pump is in the tank... but i understand what you are trying to say... like i said i would want to put a piece of fuel line in a jar of pure acetone to see what happens

Not all Rangers came with a fuel pump in the tank, I think that was what he was getting at with his comment. But a pump in the tank or not, there could still be downstream things affected by it.

my question for you, your tests, were they done with the 10% ethanol, or pure gas? what temperatures did you test this in? reason i ask, is there was mention about the acetone helping relieve surface tension, temperature would probably make a difference in effectiveness, other factors is it's reaction with ethanol and other additives in fuel (if you think the pure fuel you get is actually pure fuel, you have a lot of learning to do! the reason your fuel pumps don't rust is because there is anti rust agents in gas, there are also detergents to help clean your valves

I tested over about two years time with both "pure" gas and the 10% ethanol blend. Results were the same, there was no change between summer and winter gas or ethanol/non ethanol. And yes, I am well aware that there are TONS of additives in fuels today. I should have put "pure" in quotes when I made my original response, but I figured that most people would understand that by saying pure gas, I was referring to summer gas without ethanol.

again as i said, i realize it's a truck, i don't expect it to get 45 mpg, but if i could make it get 45 mpg, why wouldn't i? provided there are no significant risks... like i said, i can afford to fill my tank, but if i can reduce the number of dollars i put into my tank in a week, why wouldn't i?

You can get 45 mpg with a Ranger. But not in the U.S. right now since the newer Rangers with a diesel motor have not made it here for various reasons. Thus why I would LOVE to have one, even if I had to sell the Ranger I already have to get one. There is no forkin way you can get that sort of fuel economy out of a gas powered Ranger.

and for anyone who says that they don't care about gas mileage, i'll send you my paypal and you can send my $5 a week for any week you drive your truck...

I don't care about gas mileage. I would like it to be better, but there isn't much I can do to change it. I need the trucks for my work, so I can't buy a little ecobox car (not that I'd want to anyway). But I'm not sending you any money, I need all I can get to put gas in the F-350.

I hope I have answered your latest crop of questions to your satisfaction. Answers are above in RED. Thank you for your time.

 

[--weezl--]

I hope I have answered your latest crop of questions to your satisfaction. Answers are above in RED. Thank you for your time.

i was fairly sure it was common knowledge that there were additives in gas...

i was using 45mpg in our rangers as an abstract comparison though

 

[88_Eddie]

wanna save on gas? here's what you do, take ALL of the shit out of your car, NEVER allow anyone else to ride with you, eat one meal a day that consists of uncooked rice and dog food and take a leak before you get in. then, after you get out of the hospital, sue the dog food company for millions and you'll be able to put gas in a mac truck for the rest of your days.

 

[sholzy]

It really depends on the vehicle. In my Ranger, cruising at 55 around here I had to be in 4th gear or use overdrive and drop down to 4th every grade I came to. But if I cranked it up to 70, I could run overdrive without downshifting and get better fuel economy. So when I'd get on the highway, I'd just wind 'er up to 70 and cruise because that's where I got my fuel economy. Different gears or a different tire size would throw that off though. Stock tires I could run at 60-65 in overdrive and get the same result.

My '93 gets 22 - 24 mpg if I keep it 60 or less. Between 60 and 70 it drops to about 20. Over 70, I'm lucky to get 18mpg. I have a 3.08 in the rear and an auto tranny. Before I knew I shouldn't pull in OD, I would set the cruise at 60 and get 20mpg on flats and in the mountains I would take it out of OD and get 19mpg.

 

[doorgunner]

I stated this before in other threads....I knew a guy who got 24 mpg driving a Cadillac with the biggest engine made with the original carb at 70 miles an hour.

He did not add any additives to the "pure 93 Octane", or components to the engine or carb....he did rebuild the carb several times by moving internal parts around to get better gas mileage from the car.

A businessman in a suit bought the carb off the engine about a year later.....that was the end of that....


so.....if you want great gas mileage...find someone to let you into the storage room at one of the fuel manufacturers.....pick a carb off the shelf & install it on your vehicle....(simplified version...but you get the point)

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

I stated this before in other threads....I knew a guy who got 24 mpg driving a Cadillac with the biggest engine made with the original carb at 70 miles an hour.

He did not add any additives to the "pure 93 Octane", or components to the engine or carb....he did rebuild the carb several times by moving internal parts around to get better gas mileage from the car.

A businessman in a suit bought the carb off the engine about a year later.....that was the end of that....


so.....if you want great gas mileage...find someone to let you into the storage room at one of the fuel manufacturers.....pick a carb off the shelf & install it on your vehicle....(simplified version...but you get the point)

Yup, my parents drove a late 70's car down to Florida a couple times - carb'd 390 V-8 in a boat of a car (forget the exact car) with the A/C cranked up and got 24 mpg.

Now we have fuel injected 4-poppers that get the same fuel economy. The party line is that emissions of "greenhouse gasses" and the like are reduced. I say B.S. - if you're using the same amount of fuel to go the same distance, then there is no change in the amount of exhaust thrown into the atmosphere - because no matter how you slice it, you can't defy physics.

I used to blame the oil companies for this sort of thing. But as of late, I don't blame them so much. They may still have their hand in the cookie jar, I haven't ruled that out yet, but they are not the ones taking the lions share. The sad fact of the matter is that the GOVERNMENT makes more money off the sale of a gallon of gasoline than anyone else. No wonder Congress never finds anything out when they "investigate" the profits of the oil companies... it's their payday so they're not going to mess with it. But I digress from the original topic and don't want to debate political issues in this thread.

 

[strvger]

i had hoped that the myth busters test had put this acetone thing to rest a long, long time ago. guess not. too bad really. but that's just me.

 

[--weezl--]

as much as i love mythbusters, i have a huge problem with most of their testing practices... they test it one way, and leave it at that... and often there are physics problems with their results and tests... the crew doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on physics... so while some of their results are legit, a lot of them i think they bust just because their name is myth-busters, not mythconfirmers