Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements
| [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277786] |
Wed, 13 May 2015 15:26  |
Botts Chuck
Messages: 43
Registered: May 2015
Karma: -9
|
Member |
|
|
When we show our coach at open house, I often get questioned about why I don’t just write a book about all the changes that we made to our ’77 23’ GMC to improve our touring so that, “I can pick out the one that I want to do”.
The book is now available on my web site, smallrvtouring.com , where you can read about the book in both printed and e-book form. It is for sale from the publisher if you want to read about all our changes. We started with a gutted coach and hired experienced GMC technical people to do the excellent work.
I think the one that will interest the GMC group the most is how I improved my gas mileage from 8 mpg to 11.5 mpg over my testing route that includes two 6% grades that forced me to slow down from 65 to 58 mph to maintain my 43% improved gas mileage. The system paid for itself in ~1,400 miles when gas cost $3.20/gal. There is a detailed account that you can follow if you want to do the same for your GMC. It is a hybrid HHO system for a four barrel carb. I do not tow and my coach only weighs 10,000 pounds in full travel conditions. The secret is leaning out the cruise barrels and not opening up the power barrels below 6” of vacuum to maintain the improved gas mileage. Your option is to keep the vacuum above 6 inches or maintain your speed up the 6% hills. DynoShop turned the engine and passed my CA emission testing. DynoShop puts HHO systems in both big gasoline and diesel engined trucks.
I plan to be at the GMCWS fall rally in CO. to answer any questions. The final report is also on the GMCWS technical reports for the recent spring rally. No membership required to down load the power point report in PDF format.
For you 8% of the US male population with northern European ancestry who are red-green color blind like me, I have found a solution that solves that problem for less than $200. If you are red green color blind, this will open up your world to see red, green and all colors just like other humans do. Its amazing to see for the first time. But when I take the lenses off, I can still see through nature’s, and man-made camouflage. I now have the best of both worlds.
Chuck Botts
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277798 is a reply to message #277786] |
Wed, 13 May 2015 17:35  |
Daniel Starks
Messages: 20
Registered: April 2015
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
See Oxyhydrogen in Wikipedia
Daniel
-----Original Message-----
From: Gmclist [mailto:gmclist-bounces@temp.gmcnet.org] On Behalf Of Botts Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 2:27 PM
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Subject: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements
When we show our coach at open house, I often get questioned about why I don’t just write a book about all the changes that we made to our ’77 23’ GMC to improve our touring so that, “I can pick out the one that I want to do”.
The book is now available on my web site, smallrvtouring.com , where you can read about the book in both printed and e-book form. It is for sale from the publisher if you want to read about all our changes. We started with a gutted coach and hired experienced GMC technical people to do the excellent work.
I think the one that will interest the GMC group the most is how I improved my gas mileage from 8 mpg to 11.5 mpg over my testing route that includes two 6% grades that forced me to slow down from 65 to 58 mph to maintain my 43% improved gas mileage. The system paid for itself in ~1,400 miles when gas cost $3.20/gal. There is a detailed account that you can follow if you want to do the same for your GMC. It is a hybrid HHO system for a four barrel carb. I do not tow and my coach only weighs 10,000 pounds in full travel conditions. The secret is leaning out the cruise barrels and not opening up the power barrels below 6” of vacuum to maintain the improved gas mileage. Your option is to keep the vacuum above 6 inches or maintain your speed up the 6% hills. DynoShop turned the engine and passed my CA emission testing. DynoShop puts HHO systems in both big gasoline and diesel engined trucks.
I plan to be at the GMCWS fall rally in CO. to answer any questions. The final report is also on the GMCWS technical reports for the recent spring rally. No membership required to down load the power point report in PDF format.
For you 8% of the US male population with northern European ancestry who are red-green color blind like me, I have found a solution that solves that problem for less than $200. If you are red green color blind, this will open up your world to see red, green and all colors just like other humans do. Its amazing to see for the first time. But when I take the lenses off, I can still see through nature’s, and man-made camouflage. I now have the best of both worlds.
Chuck Botts
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277815 is a reply to message #277797] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 07:15 |
 |
thesmith
Messages: 589
Registered: February 2015
Location: Cary, NC
Karma: 6
|
Senior Member |
|
|
So the theory is that the "gas" acts as a catalyst to improve combustion? Plausible, but if thats the case than why would not every mass produced vehicle already have said gadget installed or at least offered as an option?
I smell an episode of mythbusters.......
Pete
A Hamilto wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 17:36SeanKidd wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 17:02HHO is hydroxy, or electrically expanded water...it's what water welders run on, not quite electrolicized water which is H2 & O2; HHO is its own beast. Call it what you want, but once the molecules are split by electricity it bubbles off as H2 and O2. If you collect it separately at the electrodes, you can have H2 in one container and O2 in another. If you do not collect them separately, you have a mix of 2 parts H2 and one part O2.
Cary, NC
1978 Center Kitchen Royale.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277817 is a reply to message #277815] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 07:45 |
jknezek
Messages: 1057
Registered: December 2007
Karma: 5
|
Senior Member |
|
|
thesmith wrote on Thu, 14 May 2015 08:15So the theory is that the "gas" acts as a catalyst to improve combustion? Plausible, but if thats the case than why would not every mass produced vehicle already have said gadget installed or at least offered as an option?
I smell an episode of mythbusters.......
Pete
A Hamilto wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 17:36SeanKidd wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 17:02HHO is hydroxy, or electrically expanded water...it's what water welders run on, not quite electrolicized water which is H2 & O2; HHO is its own beast. Call it what you want, but once the molecules are split by electricity it bubbles off as H2 and O2. If you collect it separately at the electrodes, you can have H2 in one container and O2 in another. If you do not collect them separately, you have a mix of 2 parts H2 and one part O2.
Mythbusters already did it. According to them, and many other credible sources, HHO doesn't improve mileage by itself. There are lots of other people with varying credentials that say it will. For the most part, I think the scientific consensus is that HHO will improve mileage not because it works, but because people that invest in it are determined to see an improvement. Thereby consciously or unconsciously changing their driving habits in small ways to show mileage improvement after installing a system.
There are lots of opinions available, feel free to choose your own. I know Jeff at Alex Sirum and Jim at the COOP both at least took a stab at HHO systems on GMCs and have abandoned the effort.
Thanks,
Jeremy Knezek
1976 Glenbrook
Birmingham, AL
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277829 is a reply to message #277786] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 10:41 |
George B.
Messages: 213
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Chuck:
When you did your baseline (8MPG) test were you driving by the vacuum gauge (>6) and slowing down for hills same as you were during the final mileage (11.5 MPG) tests?
Botts Chuck wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 13:26When we show our coach at open house, I often get questioned about why I don't just write a book about all the changes that we made to our '77 23' GMC to improve our touring so that, "I can pick out the one that I want to do".
I think the one that will interest the GMC group the most is how I improved my gas mileage from 8 mpg to 11.5 mpg over my testing route that includes two 6% grades that forced me to slow down from 65 to 58 mph to maintain my 43% improved gas mileage. The system paid for itself in ~1,400 miles when gas cost $3.20/gal. There is a detailed account that you can follow if you want to do the same for your GMC. It is a hybrid HHO system for a four barrel carb. I do not tow and my coach only weighs 10,000 pounds in full travel conditions. The secret is leaning out the cruise barrels and not opening up the power barrels below 6" of vacuum to maintain the improved gas mileage. Your option is to keep the vacuum above 6 inches or maintain your speed up the 6% hills. DynoShop turned the engine and passed my CA emission testing. DynoShop puts HHO systems in both big gasoline and diesel engined trucks.
I plan to be at the GMCWS fall rally in CO. to answer any questions. The final report is also on the GMCWS technical reports for the recent spring rally. No membership required to down load the power point report in PDF format.
Chuck Botts
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
George Butts
Las Vegas Nevada
73 "Custom 26' Q" & 76 23' Birchaven
71 Honda 600 Coupe & 01 Tracker Toads
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277830 is a reply to message #277829] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 11:40 |
Botts Chuck
Messages: 43
Registered: May 2015
Karma: -9
|
Member |
|
|
I ran my baseline test as I always did at 65 mph, going up 6% grades using the power barrels. The vacuum in that case drops down below 3 inches (wide open) on those two mile long 6% hills. Living in San Diego, I have to go over 4,200 high hills on every way out except on route 10 east which is less steep, but it to but still over 4,000 feet. San Diego is west of both the rocky and coastal mountains.
I get over 9 mpg at 65 when I am in low county like Florida. I remembering getting over 10 mpg when I filled up with non alcohol gasoline on one of our trips, but I have not found that anymore.
MPG never meant much to me until gas got over $4/gallon then I searched for a solution. Looking back over our 240,000 miles of touring, a 43% increase in gas milage would have saved thousands of dollars in gas money.
I wanted to find out the maximum mpg I could get if I kept out of the power barrels. It is now my choice to go for maximum mpg or maximum speed.
I put together the GMCWS Tech article so other GMC owners who plan to travel long distances could take advantage of what I learned.
If the 43% gain holds, I plan to save a whole lot on gas money on our round trip to CO GMCWS meeting this fall. It is only 1,100 miles from here to there so I will go 2,200 miles and the whole system paid for itself in ~1,400 miles.
> On May 14, 2015, at 8:41 AM, GEORGE BUTTS wrote:
>
> Chuck:
> When you did your baseline (8MPG) test were you driving by the vacuum gauge (>6) and slowing down for hills same as you were during the final mileage
> (11.5 MPG) tests?
>
>
> Botts Chuck wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 13:26
>> When we show our coach at open house, I often get questioned about why I don't just write a book about all the changes that we made to our '77 23'
>> GMC to improve our touring so that, "I can pick out the one that I want to do".
>>
>> I think the one that will interest the GMC group the most is how I improved my gas mileage from 8 mpg to 11.5 mpg over my testing route that
>> includes two 6% grades that forced me to slow down from 65 to 58 mph to maintain my 43% improved gas mileage. The system paid for itself in ~1,400
>> miles when gas cost $3.20/gal. There is a detailed account that you can follow if you want to do the same for your GMC. It is a hybrid HHO system
>> for a four barrel carb. I do not tow and my coach only weighs 10,000 pounds in full travel conditions. The secret is leaning out the cruise barrels
>> and not opening up the power barrels below 6" of vacuum to maintain the improved gas mileage. Your option is to keep the vacuum above 6 inches or
>> maintain your speed up the 6% hills. DynoShop turned the engine and passed my CA emission testing. DynoShop puts HHO systems in both big gasoline
>> and diesel engined trucks.
>>
>> I plan to be at the GMCWS fall rally in CO. to answer any questions. The final report is also on the GMCWS technical reports for the recent spring
>> rally. No membership required to down load the power point report in PDF format.
>>
>> Chuck Botts
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
> --
> George Butts
> Las Vegas Nevada
> 73 "Custom 26' Q" & 76 23' Birchaven
> 71 Honda 600 Coupe & 01 Tracker Toads
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277832 is a reply to message #277830] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 13:39 |
Botts Chuck
Messages: 43
Registered: May 2015
Karma: -9
|
Member |
|
|
> On May 14, 2015, at 9:40 AM, Botts Chuck wrote:
>
> I ran my baseline test as I always did at 65 mph, going up 6% grades using the power barrels. The vacuum in that case drops down below 3 inches (wide open) on those two mile long 6% hills. Living in San Diego, I have to go over 4,200 high hills on every way out except on route 10 east which is less steep, but it to but still over 4,000 feet. San Diego is west of both the rocky and coastal mountains.
>
> I get over 9 mpg at 65 when I am in low county like Florida. I remembering getting over 10 mpg when I filled up with non alcohol gasoline on one of our trips, but I have not found that anymore.
>
> MPG never meant much to me until gas got over $4/gallon then I searched for a solution. Looking back over our 240,000 miles of touring, a 43% increase in gas milage would have saved thousands of dollars in gas money.
>
> I wanted to find out the maximum mpg I could get if I kept out of the power barrels. It is now my choice to go for maximum mpg or maximum speed.
>
> I put together the GMCWS Tech article so other GMC owners who plan to travel long distances could take advantage of what I learned.
>
> If the 43% gain holds, I plan to save a whole lot on gas money on our round trip to CO GMCWS meeting this fall. It is only 1,100 miles from here to there so I will go 2,200 miles and the whole system paid for itself in ~1,400 miles.
>
>> On May 14, 2015, at 8:41 AM, GEORGE BUTTS wrote:
>>
>> Chuck:
>> When you did your baseline (8MPG) test were you driving by the vacuum gauge (>6) and slowing down for hills same as you were during the final mileage
>> (11.5 MPG) tests?
>>
>>
>> Botts Chuck wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 13:26
>>> When we show our coach at open house, I often get questioned about why I don't just write a book about all the changes that we made to our '77 23'
>>> GMC to improve our touring so that, "I can pick out the one that I want to do".
>>>
>>> I think the one that will interest the GMC group the most is how I improved my gas mileage from 8 mpg to 11.5 mpg over my testing route that
>>> includes two 6% grades that forced me to slow down from 65 to 58 mph to maintain my 43% improved gas mileage. The system paid for itself in ~1,400
>>> miles when gas cost $3.20/gal. There is a detailed account that you can follow if you want to do the same for your GMC. It is a hybrid HHO system
>>> for a four barrel carb. I do not tow and my coach only weighs 10,000 pounds in full travel conditions. The secret is leaning out the cruise barrels
>>> and not opening up the power barrels below 6" of vacuum to maintain the improved gas mileage. Your option is to keep the vacuum above 6 inches or
>>> maintain your speed up the 6% hills. DynoShop turned the engine and passed my CA emission testing. DynoShop puts HHO systems in both big gasoline
>>> and diesel engined trucks.
>>>
>>> I plan to be at the GMCWS fall rally in CO. to answer any questions. The final report is also on the GMCWS technical reports for the recent spring
>>> rally. No membership required to down load the power point report in PDF format.
>>>
>>> Chuck Botts
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>>
>> --
>> George Butts
>> Las Vegas Nevada
>> 73 "Custom 26' Q" & 76 23' Birchaven
>> 71 Honda 600 Coupe & 01 Tracker Toads
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277833 is a reply to message #277830] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 13:59 |
A Hamilto
Messages: 4508
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 39
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Botts Chuck wrote on Thu, 14 May 2015 11:40...MPG never meant much to me until gas got over $4/gallon then I searched for a solution. Looking back over our 240,000 miles of touring, a 43% increase in gas milage would have saved thousands of dollars in gas money.
I wanted to find out the maximum mpg I could get if I kept out of the power barrels. ... Gas price is substantially irrelevant. A dollar saved by altering behavior is a dollar you can spend on something else, and do/have more for your entire life. Most people don't get it. Everywhere they go they have the accelerator on the floor from every stop, and the brake pedal on the floor coming up on the next one. Not only are they buying more gas, but replacing cars when they prematurely wear out.
It shouldn't take 45% to get your attention. 10% is huge. 1% is worthwhile when aggregated over a lifetime.
That applies to everything, not just gas. Groceries, electricity, everything. Your behavior can net you substantial gains. Wasteful benefits no one.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277835 is a reply to message #277833] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 14:48 |
Rob
Messages: 651
Registered: November 2013
Location: Victoria, BC
Karma: 3
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You are correct: 10% is huge. If HHO really worked - there would be no debate...
If a system could demonstrate a 10% increase in mileage, using proven and accurate measurement techniques and a scientific method - they'd be installed on every vehicle in sight. An accurate test would have to be long-term, involve many test subjects and be double-blind. But if it really worked - none of that would be a problem.
Using a single 30 mile long run as the baseline measurement is the most suspect part of the 43% claim. That inaccurate baseline is then used for all other savings calculations... Major changes in the driving style between runs is the next issue. If there truly were any significant increase to be had - driving style changes would cancel each other out in long tests.
That is essentially cherry-picking data and then making a claim based on the "picked" data.
I'd hazard a guess that if the baseline was accurate and if the driving style was changed so dramatically - the increase in mileage would have been realized without installing the Mileage Shop HHO system. 10% would be easy with driving style changes alone.
Unfortunately - the claims of HHO systems fail as soon as there is any kind of scrutiny applied to the analysis. The advocates claim that this is because the person/people applying the scrutiny are "non-believers". But how could that be? It's because the physics just don't work. And that's demonstrated every time that "HHO" is subjected to any kind of scientific scrutiny.
You may believe that this is working - that's great. All sorts of people believe in all sorts of things. But if this was truly increasing mileage by any measurable amount, it would be very easy to prove. That has yet to happen. On the other hand, many organizations have proven that there is a negligible increase (if any at all!) with HHO.
You'll notice that the outfits selling these systems are very careful about making any kind of verifiable mileage increase claims. They have good lawyers...
I'm sure to be labelled a "non-believer"... But I'm OK with that.
Rob
Victoria, BC
76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath
On 2015-05-14, at 11:59 AM, A. wrote:
> Gas price is substantially irrelevant. A dollar saved by altering behavior is a dollar you can spend on something else, and do/have more for your
> entire life. Most people don't get it. Everywhere they go they have the accelerator on the floor from every stop, and the brake pedal on the floor
> coming up on the next one. Not only are they buying more gas, but replacing cars when they prematurely wear out.
>
> It shouldn't take 45% to get your attention. 10% is huge. 1% is worthwhile when aggregated over a lifetime.
>
> That applies to everything, not just gas. Groceries, electricity, everything. Your behavior can net you substantial gains. Wasteful benefits no one.
> --
> '73 23' Sequoia For Sale
> '73 23' CanyonLands For Sale
> Upper Alabama
> After all is said and done, a helluva lot more is said than done.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Rob -
Victoria, BC -
76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277837 is a reply to message #277835] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 15:01 |
James Hupy
Messages: 6806
Registered: May 2010
Karma: -62
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Rob, it is a whole lot easier to make enemies than friends. Tread lightly
on this issue, please.. You are talking to some of my friends here. Jus'
sayin.
Jim Hupy
Salem, Or
78 GMC Royale 403
On May 14, 2015 12:49 PM, "Rob" wrote:
> You are correct: 10% is huge. If HHO really worked - there would be no
> debate...
>
> If a system could demonstrate a 10% increase in mileage, using proven and
> accurate measurement techniques and a scientific method - they'd be
> installed on every vehicle in sight. An accurate test would have to be
> long-term, involve many test subjects and be double-blind. But if it really
> worked - none of that would be a problem.
>
> Using a single 30 mile long run as the baseline measurement is the most
> suspect part of the 43% claim. That inaccurate baseline is then used for
> all other savings calculations... Major changes in the driving style
> between runs is the next issue. If there truly were any significant
> increase to be had - driving style changes would cancel each other out in
> long tests.
>
> That is essentially cherry-picking data and then making a claim based on
> the "picked" data.
>
> I'd hazard a guess that if the baseline was accurate and if the driving
> style was changed so dramatically - the increase in mileage would have been
> realized without installing the Mileage Shop HHO system. 10% would be easy
> with driving style changes alone.
>
> Unfortunately - the claims of HHO systems fail as soon as there is any
> kind of scrutiny applied to the analysis. The advocates claim that this is
> because the person/people applying the scrutiny are "non-believers". But
> how could that be? It's because the physics just don't work. And that's
> demonstrated every time that "HHO" is subjected to any kind of scientific
> scrutiny.
>
> You may believe that this is working - that's great. All sorts of people
> believe in all sorts of things. But if this was truly increasing mileage by
> any measurable amount, it would be very easy to prove. That has yet to
> happen. On the other hand, many organizations have proven that there is a
> negligible increase (if any at all!) with HHO.
>
> You'll notice that the outfits selling these systems are very careful
> about making any kind of verifiable mileage increase claims. They have good
> lawyers...
>
> I'm sure to be labelled a "non-believer"... But I'm OK with that.
>
> Rob
> Victoria, BC
> 76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath
>
> On 2015-05-14, at 11:59 AM, A. wrote:
>
>> Gas price is substantially irrelevant. A dollar saved by altering
> behavior is a dollar you can spend on something else, and do/have more for
> your
>> entire life. Most people don't get it. Everywhere they go they have the
> accelerator on the floor from every stop, and the brake pedal on the floor
>> coming up on the next one. Not only are they buying more gas, but
> replacing cars when they prematurely wear out.
>>
>> It shouldn't take 45% to get your attention. 10% is huge. 1% is
> worthwhile when aggregated over a lifetime.
>>
>> That applies to everything, not just gas. Groceries, electricity,
> everything. Your behavior can net you substantial gains. Wasteful benefits
> no one.
>> --
>> '73 23' Sequoia For Sale
>> '73 23' CanyonLands For Sale
>> Upper Alabama
>> After all is said and done, a helluva lot more is said than done.
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277841 is a reply to message #277837] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 17:12 |
Rob
Messages: 651
Registered: November 2013
Location: Victoria, BC
Karma: 3
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I didn't bring up the topic! If someone wants to build one of these systems using an old Skippy jar - so be it. But advocating spending $1400 on a system is something else...
Friends should look out for one another.
Rob
Victoria, BC
76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath
On 2015-05-14, at 1:01 PM, James Hupy wrote:
> Rob, it is a whole lot easier to make enemies than friends. Tread lightly
> on this issue, please.. You are talking to some of my friends here. Jus'
> sayin.
> Jim Hupy
> Salem, Or
> 78 GMC Royale 403
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Rob -
Victoria, BC -
76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277842 is a reply to message #277837] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 17:39 |
Botts Chuck
Messages: 43
Registered: May 2015
Karma: -9
|
Member |
|
|
At the end of this month we take off for a rally that is 160 mile round trip that will included going over 4 6% grades in each direction for a total of 8 6% grades. I will fill up our tank, make the trip, and fill it up at the end to get our average mpg on the trip. I will try for the max mpg which means slowing down on the steep hills to stay above 6 inch of vacuum. I will publish my result of hills, speed below 65 mph and mpg results.
Then there is the GMCWS rally in Co, a 2,200 mile round trip, which we have to cross the continual divide in addition to going over the various hill in our west. I will count the number of 6% hills in each direction and write down the speed up the hills. Again I will measure the fuel against our miles traveled and make a report on our average mpg.
These will establish if the HHO system is a benefit.
> On May 14, 2015, at 1:01 PM, James Hupy wrote:
>
> Rob, it is a whole lot easier to make enemies than friends. Tread lightly
> on this issue, please.. You are talking to some of my friends here. Jus'
> sayin.
> Jim Hupy
> Salem, Or
> 78 GMC Royale 403
> On May 14, 2015 12:49 PM, "Rob" wrote:
>
>> You are correct: 10% is huge. If HHO really worked - there would be no
>> debate...
>>
>> If a system could demonstrate a 10% increase in mileage, using proven and
>> accurate measurement techniques and a scientific method - they'd be
>> installed on every vehicle in sight. An accurate test would have to be
>> long-term, involve many test subjects and be double-blind. But if it really
>> worked - none of that would be a problem.
>>
>> Using a single 30 mile long run as the baseline measurement is the most
>> suspect part of the 43% claim. That inaccurate baseline is then used for
>> all other savings calculations... Major changes in the driving style
>> between runs is the next issue. If there truly were any significant
>> increase to be had - driving style changes would cancel each other out in
>> long tests.
>>
>> That is essentially cherry-picking data and then making a claim based on
>> the "picked" data.
>>
>> I'd hazard a guess that if the baseline was accurate and if the driving
>> style was changed so dramatically - the increase in mileage would have been
>> realized without installing the Mileage Shop HHO system. 10% would be easy
>> with driving style changes alone.
>>
>> Unfortunately - the claims of HHO systems fail as soon as there is any
>> kind of scrutiny applied to the analysis. The advocates claim that this is
>> because the person/people applying the scrutiny are "non-believers". But
>> how could that be? It's because the physics just don't work. And that's
>> demonstrated every time that "HHO" is subjected to any kind of scientific
>> scrutiny.
>>
>> You may believe that this is working - that's great. All sorts of people
>> believe in all sorts of things. But if this was truly increasing mileage by
>> any measurable amount, it would be very easy to prove. That has yet to
>> happen. On the other hand, many organizations have proven that there is a
>> negligible increase (if any at all!) with HHO.
>>
>> You'll notice that the outfits selling these systems are very careful
>> about making any kind of verifiable mileage increase claims. They have good
>> lawyers...
>>
>> I'm sure to be labelled a "non-believer"... But I'm OK with that.
>>
>> Rob
>> Victoria, BC
>> 76 Royale - Rear Twins/Dry Bath
>>
>> On 2015-05-14, at 11:59 AM, A. wrote:
>>
>>> Gas price is substantially irrelevant. A dollar saved by altering
>> behavior is a dollar you can spend on something else, and do/have more for
>> your
>>> entire life. Most people don't get it. Everywhere they go they have the
>> accelerator on the floor from every stop, and the brake pedal on the floor
>>> coming up on the next one. Not only are they buying more gas, but
>> replacing cars when they prematurely wear out.
>>>
>>> It shouldn't take 45% to get your attention. 10% is huge. 1% is
>> worthwhile when aggregated over a lifetime.
>>>
>>> That applies to everything, not just gas. Groceries, electricity,
>> everything. Your behavior can net you substantial gains. Wasteful benefits
>> no one.
>>> --
>>> '73 23' Sequoia For Sale
>>> '73 23' CanyonLands For Sale
>>> Upper Alabama
>>> After all is said and done, a helluva lot more is said than done.
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] My book about over 100 improvements [message #277843 is a reply to message #277842] |
Thu, 14 May 2015 18:16 |
 |
USAussie
Messages: 15912
Registered: July 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Karma: 6
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Chuck,
What if you used the HHO system only one way to or from the GMCWS Rally in Pueblo, Colorado.
That would give you a direct comparison.
Regards,
Rob M.
-----Original Message-----
From: Botts Chuck
At the end of this month we take off for a rally that is 160 mile round trip that will included going over 4 6% grades in each
direction for a total of 8 6% grades. I will fill up our tank, make the trip, and fill it up at the end to get our average mpg on
the trip. I will try for the max mpg which means slowing down on the steep hills to stay above 6 inch of vacuum. I will publish my
result of hills, speed below 65 mph and mpg results.
Then there is the GMCWS rally in Co, a 2,200 mile round trip, which we have to cross the continual divide in addition to going over
the various hill in our west. I will count the number of 6% hills in each direction and write down the speed up the hills. Again I
will measure the fuel against our miles traveled and make a report on our average mpg.
These will establish if the HHO system is a benefit.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Regards,
Rob M. (USAussie)
The Pedantic Mechanic
Sydney, Australia
'75 Avion - AUS - The Blue Streak TZE365V100428
'75 Avion - USA - Double Trouble TZE365V100426
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Sep 29 21:45:11 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01358 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
